What do you guys think of sampling? Is it a creative artform, or is it boring and unoriginal? Don't forget to join our discord! We got a fun little community there - discord.gg/zaNmEcByrT

@playercore7444

Жыл бұрын

It can be both, it depends.

You're pretty good at this music stuff 😁. Also, killer editing as usual.

@KyleReidMu

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you :)

Sampling should be considered fair use and the only reason it isn’t is because record moguls lobby the government hard to keep it illegal. Samples are 100% transformative but if that was the legal president record labels would lose a bunch of profits. Literally only illegal because of capitalism.

@thevoiceofthelost

8 ай бұрын

Just like many other good things. Thanks to Capitalism, only big names who are making money get to sample. Terrible news for someone who wants to create hauntological sample based hip-hop.. My newfound passion is illegal..

@McK9999

6 ай бұрын

It's only illegal if you get caught and hauled into court.

@thevoiceofthelost

6 ай бұрын

@@McK9999 True, knowing my luck tho, I'll catch them fines. Still gonna try tho cause fuck it.

@bigdonza08

6 ай бұрын

Sampling is only 60% transformative. Coffin nails by mf doom samples David Bowie's space oddity but you can barely notice. Crystal dolphin samples one of kingo's songs and it's the only thing you can hear.

@SeanIgo

8 күн бұрын

No. You're not transforming music by stealing it and talking shit over it. Moron.

love your content man

Great video and great content!

Good work for a short time i like the way you summarized that piece.💯keep up the smoove work☝🏾🆙💯🔥

It's more of a legal headache and also you have scammers that will try and get the producer to pay for the clearances which could be upwards of 20 Grand and more.....Plus, depending on how many artists are on the copyright including the producers and arrangers etc, it is a rabbit hole in most cases not worth it unless you have a great legal team.

You mention James Brown's Funky Drummer, but not the song Amen, Brother by The Winstons? That's crazy bro.

Great video!

if you tell someone random make a beat , you think it'll be easy for them ...fuck no! , sampling is an art - much love

Your explanation of sampling AT THE START OF THE VIDEO is oversimplified. Sampling doesn't mean copying and pasting, it means transforming in such a way so to adapt the samples in ones own songs.

if i buy a painting then paint over that painting or make a collage and decide to sell it do i need to give royalties to the original painter... no. how many types of Can't Buy Me Love type movies are out there, did they all pay royalties to the first teen romcom movie ever made... no. So why do we need to pay royalties to music artist for doing the same thing? making sampling illegal only stifles creativity.

Being sued for samples in general is just pure fuckery 😒

@colourbasscolourbassweapon2135

8 күн бұрын

fr dude no cap ngl dude i don't sample after guys music but even i think this is just dumb af tbh

Grand Wizzard Theodore invented scratching. Other than that I like the video.

jet set radio music so good bro

There's something so wholesome and Nardwaur about this video. Obvs different formats but the energy feels similar. Dope!

I'm not the biggest hip-hop head ever, but from my experience sampling is an insanely creative artform that should be left to flourish. I think of it like cover songs. Covering artists' songs out of respect or to one up said artist has been a tradition in rock music for close to a century now. Just like sampling, there are insanely creative cover songs that outdo the original and there's insanely boring ones that don't really add much to the experience (looking at you, Weezer's Teal album.) Art isn't just a personal thing. Art is a reflection of the human experience, and some people's art speaks to others in such a way that they feel like they could use and refurbish it to make something greater. Plus, personally, I think it's a really fun test of your music knowledge to see if you can pick up on the sample without looking it up. I can't tell you how excited I was when I heard Klink by Death Grips for the first time cause Black Flag is probably in my top 3 favorite bands.

@KyleReidMu

2 жыл бұрын

Dude yes I totally agree with every point you made (even the dig at weezer LMAO) I personally would be honored if someone sampled my music but unfortunately, every artist is different

This video is sick, how long does it take to edit?

@KyleReidMu

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you! It kind of depends on the video but it averages around 20-25 hours

@oooouaa

7 ай бұрын

​@@KyleReidMudaym bro respect you

Dude great video. Just wanted to say some of those albums when you mention years go across the screen too fast in my opinion.

@KyleReidMu

3 жыл бұрын

Ahh ok good to know, thank you! I’m glad you liked the video

surprised you didn't mention the books

@KyleReidMu

3 жыл бұрын

I was kicking myself when I realized I didn’t lol

extremely underrated, sampling is a beautiful art that should be protected by law

old school uk dubstep uses a lot of dub reggae samples tbh

Grand Wizard Theodore invented the scratch.

not just hip pop tbh no cap

The disrespect to name all these other people in sampling and pioneers of hiphop, but to say 'Clyde what ever his name is', when his Funky drummer track changed the game. Don't be a dick bro. Give CLYDE STUBBLEFIELD the respect he deserves. Over 3000 samples of his work and barely a penny eared from it, you could at least get his name right.

@davidwest5938

8 ай бұрын

Totally agree. Respect and credit are super important. And not a replacement for deserved financial gain, but a bare minimum we should do to one another as artists and musicians.

"You spend sometimes months writing, rehearsing and recording these albums and creating these songs. There's a lot of work that goes into their creation. They're like your children. Then someone else comes along and can take your master recordings, cut them up and take the bits they want, put a drum beat over it and slap their name on it, then release it and make money from it? I'm like...but that's MY music. How is that fair? I couldn't do that to someone and live with it."

...when you have Adderall but no ADHD.... jk, great vid!

@KyleReidMu

2 жыл бұрын

lol I'm glad you liked the vid!

You a NakeyJakey fan?

Clyde Stubblefield, do some research kid

DJ Kool Herc brought the reggae sound system and block party culture from Jamaica to NY, which begat Hip Hop. Grand Wizzard Theodore is credited as inventing scratching, not Grandmaster Flash and the Funky Drummer's name is Clyde Stubblefield. Other than those omissions, decent video.

Grand Master Flash Was Not The First D.J. To Scratch.

Weird Al Samplevic

First of all, I want to say that this video is a pretty good introduction to the concept and some of the history of sampling and is just generally well made. Sampling is a super interesting art form in my opinion. But while this video is super entertaining as well as generally informative and was obviously not made with any ill intentions, there is unfortunately some misinformation in here that I would like to clear up, as well as adding a couple of things. I'm currently in the process of writing a research paper that takes a closer look at how the legal framework surrounding sampling shaped the Hip-Hop industry, but looking specifically at the materials that were being sampled after 1991. Why specifically after 1991? Well, unlike what you've presented in the video, the case involving Biz Markie and Gilbert O'Sullivan was the first one that actually had to be settled in court. All prior disputes over sampling and copyright were settled outside of court. Why does this matter? Because prior to that case, there was no legal precedent concerning sampling, nor any specific mention of the term in US copyright laws. Sampling also isn't "illegal" per se and it never has been. The whole issue is that, for any copyrighted recording, the rights holders to both the composition and the actual recording or "master" itself (which can be entirely different entities), can step in and make a claim, unless they have previously given you permission. Copyright law in general is ridiculously complicated and oftentimes contradictory to the point where, a little more recently, judges can't even agree on whether short samples need to be cleared or not (the so called "de minimis" or "small enough to be trivial" exception). The other major exception being Fair Use, which, to be honest, is the most arbitrary and vague thing ever. There are a number of criteria, but not only are they vague in themselves (such as the original recording being reused for "educational" purposes, or "transformative value" being added) outside of "being used for non-commercial purposes", but not all of them have to even necessarily be met. And the most ridiculous part is that one of those criteria is only using a small portion. In other words: Even though "technically" the de minimis rule doesn't apply (except when a judge ruled that it does), you can still argue that the sample is Fair Use, simply because it is short. But wait, there's more: Prior to 1972, sound recordings were not necessarily under federal copyright and, depending on the state, not under copyright at all, although it was possible, for a limited period of time, to retroactively get it copyrighted. So, at least in theory, for any pre-1972 recording, sampling may or may not be fair game. The term "sound recording" also specifically does not apply to "sounds accompanying motion pictures", so (again, theoretically), one could argue that sampling movies or TV shows (including music) should be treated differently than "sound recordings", meaning it wouldn't be subject to the same legal precedent. In practice though, it is tough to say how cases like that would be ruled with all the already existing inconsistencies. That being said, my paper essentially argues that "Enter the Wu-Tang (36 Chambers)" by the Wu-Tang Clan, whether they cleared their samples or not, could serve as somewhat of a blueprint on how to do extensive creative sampling, without too much of a risk of getting into legal trouble for not clearing anything. Nearly all direct samples were either from before 1972, limited to drums only (and often taken from break-beat CDs that are pretty much made for sampling/DJing), from another Hip-Hop artist known for sampling (they literally sample Biz Markie, aka the guy who lost the first court case), super short like a single sound from LL Cool J's "Mama Said Knock You Out" (1995), or small snippets from motion pictures (mostly Kung-Fu Movies from Hong Kong, meaning the whole process of suing would become way more tedious). Other than that, there are a lot of transformative interpolations, where they are making a lyrical reference to certain other works, rather than copying them entirely: they use similar enough words and cadences that one can clearly tell what they were going for, but it's different and short enough to most likely fall under Fair Use. TL;DR: The video's great, but a little inaccurate at times, and the whole issue is much, much more complicated, to the point that it's honestly ridiculous.

@Felix-es8rq

Жыл бұрын

Great job man, I learned something new from you!

@impulse_xs

Жыл бұрын

The only reason it’s even this complicated is because the music industry had millions of dollars to lobby congress with. If we’re operating purely on common logic it’s clear that sampling is protected by fair use. It’s scary how easy the law can be bought. The sampling from 36 Chambers is basically the textbook definition of a “transformative work”.

Sampling is fine if I like the artist, or song

No mention of j dilla

hiphop as many protest arts emerged fighting the oppressive laws and elitist business industries like music records.

yakubian

I find sampling fine it puts a lot of ummph too music artists songs, but even tho sampling is a dangerous thing to do I know Hideki has a lot of samples from many companies like Great Services and G-Zero etc. Because again Hidieki has a lot of samples from many companies and artists hopefully tho he gave credit to these CDs and musicians. Also, the law is no joke about the whole sampling business like Vanilla Ice taking samples from that other band I forgot their name and went to court for his sampling and also Enigma got sued for using a tiwans couple song and even a church choir as well. Plus, again sampling is fine just needs permission from the company, artists and some of money, because you know that clip is not for free lets be real money has some part into the game. Furthermore, artist now are a bit good at their songs without no use of sampling but then again someone would be like, " wait a minute I know that sample, beat or rhthym from somewhere.," because people have good hearing from songs so if one person points it out then court comes in.

Just because something is currently a Law, does not mean that it isn't morally or ethically questionable at best, and detrimental or evil at its core, at worst. Slavery used to be Legal. As in, "Lawfully Allowed". This will change by my hand, as the lawnis designed to protect the 99.9%, not the .01%. Which violates the folllwing: -Life(Right to seek a living creating through whag inspired you to want to Live. As it is true that if you take away the thing that inspired them, and that inspiration simply goes away, completely) Equality (Those who have not had access to the same level of education to be able to study music theory, among other extraordinary artistical formations of our deepest levels of expression, we must recognize that, equality is a 1:1 rationof fairness. Equal rights for Equal guiding lights. Equal rights for a sincere effort to protectand extend towards what should be protected. One should have the unlimited unrestrictive capability to recrate and imagine in equal proportions differentiating themselves from all original works, but reminding others from where it came from should not ever be see as theft or anything other than honoring and paying homage to that persons work. A 1 second sample of a song that has a 5 minute run time, is not Equality or equal proportionate to justify more than a 1% royalty. A full track with all new lyrics and all new performance shpuld never exceed more than 50% as it is absolutely not an equality exchange. The royalty exchange must be equally propositioned and proportionate. Liberty - To prevent or alienate a person's ability of fully embrace and setforth towards the Liberations geanted by our declaration of independence would factually state that, prevention of that opportunity is like A Hell on Earth. It is like a Prison. Our Country was founded on Principles that have not only stood the test of time, but have also, far beyond anreasonable doubt to object, that it also has those same protections to adapt and ensure these protections are reinforced as our technological advances occur throughout the years. Pursuit of Happiness - Preventing someone from reimagining and/or adapting that which inspired them to "seek out = pursue", then the prevention thereof acts as a barrier blocking the majority to seek it to begin with, because ofbthe FACT, that, if that very special and very unique presentation of transcendant work was not presented at the precise moment, then he, or she, or anyone who chooses to set aside their unrestricted Pursuit of Happiness in exchange for a Paycheck out of necessity, hinders and outright destroys that fact, proven by the understanding that 99.99999% of ALL HUMANS tobhave ever existed only ever amounted to average. There was only 1 Jesus. There was only 1 Nikola Tesla. There was only 1 Michael Jordan and 1 Protege in Kobe Bryant. Just like there were only 1 set of founding fathers. An extraordinary group of Gentlemen who agreed to solidify that very Truth that I am reaffirming. Justice For All - In the fact that 99.999% of those who are not receoving Justice for themselves just to protect the .01%, does not serve, in Actuality, or, in the Spirit of "For All", then the "next best thing" must occur. Justice for the Overwhelming Vast Majorty. Everything must be rewritten with the question asked "Is this Law written with the best intentions to protect ALLNof Humanity, or does it, with the Mathematical Data Factuals in hand, prove true, far beyond a reasonable doubt to agree otherwise, that this law in actuality only benefits the .01%? If the answer is yes, then it must be re-written to stand on that new ground. Will we do it? The answer is "Yes"... "if" we can also ensure that all Politicians are Charity Based Positions and only the Highest ranking positions requiring full time work are paid a Living Wage and absolutely not a Penny more. If something "Could be Free", then it should be. If all diseases "Could be cuted", then the should be. If a position "Could be compromised", then it should constantly be asked the question, how can we make sure absolutely under mo circumstances whatsoever that not a single member of our government could ever gain from insider knowledge or be bribed, then we "should" be doing that. And if "they" wont agree to it? Then they have proven their dishonesty to the protections of the greatest Humanity efforts possibly, in order to protect Capitalism. Some form of Capitalism will always be needed, but theres a reality we face that supercedes all which is Absolute Right vs Absolute wrong. A cure should never be withheld in favor of a lifelong treatment. The fact about what is Truly in our foods need to be aired on primetime daily. Maximum Impact FIRST should always be followed, as it is MORE IMPORTANT than any .01% personal agenda. Wave the Magic Wand once and save a Billion, or continue to pour resource after resource after reaource into a problem that will never go away without eradicating the root cause of the disease to begin with? If it takes 2 Billion Dollars to build 400,000 Wells in impoverished nations in the world, then that 1 action? Just one time? Serves 800,000,000 Million people per Day. That's 292 Billion Clean drinking Water sessions per year. That aingle action? Effectively eradicates, entirely, 99% of all water born illnesses, saving 833,000 Lives Per Year. This is the Truth. The Math doesn't lie. But People with Profit Centric Agendas do. And they always will. St Jude Cancer Treatment center? They raise 2 Billion Per Year. Their CEO makes 1.3 Million per year. The average cost of their treatment is $250,000. That same $250,000 may cure 1 patient. But it will build 50 wells, where each well serves 2,000 People per day. 100,000 People Per day, and 36.5 Million(36,500,000) clean water sessions per Year.. Translation? When doing ANYTHING good, ask yourself, what is the absolute most amount of people I can help with any particular skills you have? For me? It's writing. For others its Acting, or Singing, or Engineering a Cure for a Rare form of Cancer thatnwould never get passed under current Capitalistic Protectionsms. The time is now to Transform this World into what it was truly meant to be all along. A Heaven on Earth because WE are the divinity as Co-Creators. We are the Guardians of Humanity and everything that actually represents the Purebess of Compassion. In a group of 100 theres always a single or a couple or truly pote t bad dudes but no rational Human Being if they believed this was somehow, someway possible couldn't simply could not help but support that because youd know if you were given the choice and only had 2 choices, save 80, or save 8,000, you go for the greatest impact possible so that one day, you wont have to choose, and those, around them will take care of the problem because they'll be equipped all on their own to do that very thing. Everybody needs a little help sometimes. But the greatest feeling is inspiring their self empowerment. Thats when you know, that you've truly done your Job.

I think sampling is an artform, but it is using prior art and thus the original songwriter and recording need to be credited and paid their percentage of the royality. One of the first lawsuits I knew of was Bob James discovering many of his recording had been sample especially a tune called Westchester Lady. Westchester Lady had been from just using a piece of James keyboard work and other had chopped it to death, but enough was recognizable that they were able to use and get paid for it. A lot of Jazz artists music has been used by people sampling. So yes you sample you need to pay. Nowaday people are trying to avoid sampling to save money and find Beats that are similar or they are re-recording the music with musicians so they then own that sample. So what needs to be done is copyright law needs to come up with a form of copyright for a sample that permission, crediting and payment for using a sample that doesn't break the bank artist using a sample.

For me, if a law prohibits creativity, I think it can be disregarded :) maybe I got this from Kanye

It's not your responsibility to clear it if you sell it, It's the person using the sample in the project to clear it. But I agree it's an art and it's not that serious to me for example sample away on my beats just give me credit that's all.

Some of this is wrong.. While I can’t exactly say who did, 96 couldn’t have been the first or even CLOSE to the “first all sample albums”.. It’s LITERAL instrumental albums from Nujables, Dilla, and others in 93 of all samples.. And no micro sampling like quite a few sample styles (as far as anyone can tell) would again go to Dilla seemly being the first.. He has complete instrumentals of micro samples in the 90s…

Iam not illegal

@KyleReidMu

3 жыл бұрын

Sorry to break it to you jade 😬

@salaam76

Жыл бұрын

It's not your responsibility to clear it jade if you sell it, Its the person using the sample in the project to clear it.

not really breaking the law as long as you clear it

pierre is pure cap.

Of course this is my opinion coming from someone not so much in the core hip hop genre but rather the wider electronic genre… to me the hip hop technique mentioned here is not sampling, that is just taking a ten second part of someone else’s track and just singing your own words a top of it, which is cool, but.. significantly lower effort and ergo I can 100% understand the reasons for it not being OK with the original song owners. I’m not defending Daft Punk here either as I love their music so much, but Harder Better Faster Stronger, as much as I love that track, is a very lazy track up until the last section were they finally chop everything up. Edwin birdsong got next to no recognition outside of diehard daft punk fans looking up the samples. Robot rock, don’t get me started, atrocious example of sampling. But the song still bangs so whatever. The original band still got next to no further recognition for it. Sampling is an art, so treat it as such. Don’t take say, the Mona Lisa, and draw your own stickman on it and sell it as your own piece of art. However, if you take multiple magazines, books, whatever, chop out different shapes and parts from said magazines, recompose it into your own image that has true relevance, yeah that’s your own thing and you’re honourably, respectfully, paying homage to previous things that have existed. And you deserve full rights to that thing you made. Face to face from daft punk is a true sampling masterpiece, using the micro sampling technique spreading across 6-7 songs, using the samples to form makebelieve words, which don’t exist, but sound like lyrics to the song. Just great stuff. Hip hop is great, I like what I’ve heard of it, but.. a lot of it is huge long samples with a cool drumbeat (that’s also probably sampled) and some singing a top of it. Which does act as a punch in the face for the people who worked on the original tracks. Correct me if I’m wrong because I don’t know much on hip hop, just a few that I’ve heard and some input from this video.

I think sampling is extremely creative, at the same time you should not simply be able to take someone else's (no matter how obscure) work and make money without compensating the original artist. Like it or not it's a form of piracy. Especially, when there are millions of ways to create new, original melodies and other types of sounds. Ironically, Rappers used to always talk about BITING their style, yet THEY are the biggest biters!🤣😁😂 I especially hate when a producer straight rides (8-16 bars) on the original artist HIT, making millions and doesn't want to pay for it?!? Simple get permission and go H.A.M. or better yet, make your own original music!

Capitalism is why sampling is an issue. If people's needs weren't locked behind paywalls they would make art for art's sake completley rsther than worrying about monetizing it and worrying about not heing paid when some of their art is reworked into someone else's. If we ever took away the paywall for rights and needs, a lot of these ossues would fade away.

bro just stop making music

you’re white

Hip-hop sampling is literally just stealing Like you're literally just adding your name on top of someone else's music it's just wrong

@rjcrusty

9 ай бұрын

no it’s not. you need an excuse to shit talk a genre you don't like (possibly due to underlying racism) so you decide be ignorant instead actually looking at facts 👍🏾

@liuzh1han

9 ай бұрын

@@rjcrusty what the fuck do you mean racism??? I love black music, especially jazz, bebop is one of the most revolutionary music genres of all time, providing extremely complex harmonies and rhythmic beats. YET THESE EXACT SAME SONGS are being sampled and stolen by "aspiring hip hop artists" who add shitty explicit lyrics on top without any real melodic or harmonic values and just act as a way to circumvent the copyright system by hiding behind the fair use law

@liuzh1han

8 ай бұрын

@@oscz5057 I hate every single form of music that involves sampling including pop hip-hop and rap And no I don't hate explicit vocabulary I hate when people use other people's work add "singing" and call it theirs It's fucking bullshit

@skywaymags4598

5 ай бұрын

@@liuzh1han To hate something you haven’t fully explored doesn’t allow for new ways of thinking, understanding, let alone perspective and ultimately appreciation. Humans are samplers and we all recycle, music or other. What about “real musicians” that have adopted and adapted sampling into a mix of their own playing? Would you not be interested in the sonic possibilities or innovation? Sampling can be the ultimate form of respecting music. It is to be without the ego. If you’re feeling open minded, I’d suggest massive attack’s mezzanine. 👍

@liuzh1han

5 ай бұрын

@@skywaymags4598 wtf no i never said that sampling is bad i just said that the way most hiphop artists and rappers do sampling is wrong like they barely do anything transformative and just steal the song as is and the stuff they barely do is mostly braindead mumbling with no meaning behind each sentence it is outright normalised theft