Amiga.org
Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: Giana on January 15, 2007, 11:53:27 AM
-
Hi all,
Interesting ... Please read this.
http://yro.slashdot.org/yro/07/01/14/0113234.shtml
Giana
-
Covered here too (http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?t=46844).
Also see http://pelulamu.net/timbaland/ (http://pelulamu.net/timbaland/) for tons of links.
-
This things usually happens, exist thousands of songs, is possible that some songs sounds similar. I had a rock group some years ago, we made a lot of songs, a couple years ago i found a song of Billy Corgan that have the same tune that one of our songs, and he made the song after we composed our song, but it's impossible that Billy Corgan heard our song, is a simple coincidence.
Anyway, it sounds really similar, not only the main tune...
-
@Balrogsoft
Yep. But in this case such evidences were presented that leaves no room for guessing.
-
@balrogsoft:
you should also listen to the ring-tone by Timbafuckenland (from the same guy who did the YouTube video), it's identical to the original!!! It is _not_ just coincidence... "sounds the same". No, it's IS the same
Hope these MTV fanboys (all the ones that live off of MTV and made by MTV) die!
-
This is more than just coincidence, for certain. When processed, you can hear the original in the background of the song "Do It." Not just sounds like it, but IS IT recorded into the song.
Look, if you're going to steal, don't be so stupid as to include the evidence of the crime. Cripes, these are probably the same people who video themselves breaking into a house and leave the tape behind. (Or DVD, or memory card, or whatever your favorite recording media is :-))
-
or whatever your favorite recording media is
stone and chisel?
-
This things usually happens, exist thousands of songs, is possible that some songs sounds similar. I had a rock group some years ago, we made a lot of songs, a couple years ago i found a song of Billy Corgan that have the same tune that one of our songs, and he made the song after we composed our song, but it's impossible that Billy Corgan heard our song, is a simple coincidence.
If you did listen to the song, then you should also have heard that it was more than just similarity and a couple of samples stolen. You can actually hear the sid/mod running in background of the nelly furtado song if you listen carefully.
-
I hope something is done about this.
-
Yes something should be done about this, we cannot let this purp get away with it!
Its amazing that he could steal that and so blatently call it his own original work, we should mount a campaign, amiga style.
word!
-
I watched the second video on youtube (the one about the ringtones). At the end, where youtube puts links to related videos, there's a link to another coopting suckage. Some lame took the title of the ringtones video and made one of those lame still pictures fading in and out videos promoting childhood cancer. It's somehow worse than the Timbaland thing. :-(
-
I dont think this guy is so involved. It is probably some of his employee who came up with some cool sounds, he is maybe involved in the demo scene himself, then he gives a new "beat" to timberland and he aproves it and stamps his name on the tune.
So I hope he feels like a dumbass now that he is made an idiot on the net by stealing C64 music haha... that is so gangstah! :lol:
-
Just sent details and a few links to BBC Radio1's Newsbeat, hopefully they might pick the story up. Maybe I should forward it to some of the DJ's too.
-
Excellent ! Result !!
Well, anyway, I hope they do something with it :-D
-
I hope they do something with it
Yeah, lots of publicity is as good as cash, which helps out the guy that has to go up against Timbalands lawyer zoo.
-
a still (http://preacher.stc.cx/files/sidstation.jpg) from Timbaland and Busta Rhymes in Studio (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1nGlDk0k7MA)
Now check this out: http://www.sidstation.com/ (http://www.sidstation.com/)
Kudos to "old64scener" for spotting this... :-)
Small explanation: The ripped version of the song is actually the C64 version by GRG (http://www.c64.org/HVSC/VARIOUS/A-F/Blues_Muz/Gallefoss_Glenn/Acid_Jazz.sid) (this is a fully legit cover, as explained here (http://www.fairlight.fi/tempest/)). Some people wondered how the C64 track was recorded, well here is the answer.
-
Neat. $1050, eh? Back in high school I designed a 16 SID sound card. It was decoded into stereo channels, eight SIDs each, by dividing up the I/O space in $DE00 for left and $DF00 for right. Later I figured out that the 128 had better I/O space decoding and set it up to work in other ranges, including SID's mirror space using raw decoding of the address bus.
I wish I had built it. At least I'd have 16 extra SIDs laying around now :-)
-
@Wilse: maybe get Bush and his gestapo to bomb the "world famous" rippers? :-D
-
weirdami wrote:
...
those lame still pictures fading in and out videos promoting childhood cancer. It's somehow worse than the Timbaland thing. :-(
"promoting childhood cancer" ??? I think that's a first one! The world IS going to hell! :)
-
Re: Did Producer Timbaland Steal From the Demoscene?
Ask Tigger.
-
@piru:
heh, so instead of just doing some research and using the MOD with a normal comptuer they went the long-winded road and bought a SidStation just to rip this :)
Awesome!
-
Not for nothing, but because I still own C64 hardware, I happily play SIDs on my laptop's crappy speaker using DeliPlayer or SIDplayer. There's a SID player for the Amiga that I like as well. But Stereo SID Player on a real C64 is tops. mmmmmmmm of course there's the 8580 in the 128D, not exact, but I won't rehash any debates on the differences in sound and quality.
ANYWAY, the possibility of them having paid $1050 to steal this makes me feel a little better that there was a bit of a sting. Although, it's not enough.
I sent an email to UMG (Universal Music Group, parent group of Geffen Records) pointing to the massive discussions about this. Being MLK day, I doubt they'll see it until tomorrow, if they "see" it at all. I also found Timbaland's MySpace profile and left a comment there, as well as an email. I doubt the comment will make it past moderation, though.
-
Hahaha, LoadWB,
I thought the same: glad they paid for it, and at least some cool guys (makers of the SIDStation) got something! But yeah, not enough of a "sting" :)
-
Front page of rollingstone.com (http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2007/01/16/kanye-west-and-fall-out-boy-get-intimate-finnish-artists-after-nelly-furtado-jamie-foxx-parses-own-vocabulary/) now.
-
thats typical. Black rapper americans are about as musically talented as my a s shole.
-
WOW! That page does NOT render even 50% right under Opera!
But good to hear that that it's getting some attention finally!
@mikrucio:
Nice blanket statement pal... I don't know this guy, Timbaland, although he doesn't strike me much like a talented guy, but like I said, I don't know much about him, and granted I don't really like or want to listen to rap (with DMX being the only exception), but a lot of these guys do have talent, maybe not in classical piano, but musical talent. I think it's the attitude they have that ruins true credibility/respectibility a lot of times. Which sucks, especially for them.
At the same time its partially understandable... I mean if I lived in a ghetto and life around me seemed biased, predetermined to be unsuccessful, and hopeless (no way to become a success as in the typical interpretation of success of a modern society), then I can see myself acting as if nothing matters and I don't care about anything and anybody, my life included. Then I can see myself having such an attitude. Then I can see myself resorting to grasping anything that gives me power, like guns and drug trade and blood money.
Of course, fortunately (or actually unfortunately because primarily it's not done out of pity, but for exploitational reasons) for these kids, there's MTV and various other recording/publishing companies and their money-hungry execs and suits, and they see plenty of $$$$ to be made when these kids are turned into "stars". So the vicious cycle continues: poor black kids exploited by rich white guys, the only difference being that nowadays they have to give'em a "cut" of the riches (which many call it "giving them opportunities", which it's not). A small cut to become a slave of a different sort. Perhaps it's so. Perhaps not.
Anyways, feel free to ignore this monologue, I just had to write it
-
Excellent... "on the cover of the Rolling Stone" hehehehe
THAT will get peoples' attention. And rightly so.
So my gf and I had a discussion about this tonight. I am pretty ripped about this situation. No, I have nothing at stake personally, but I have very deep issues with a person taking credit for someone else's accomplishments, creations, and so forth. It is simply not right. Like I posted on the Daily Hook,
And that is where it all falls: the unquestionable talent of those who truly create. Think about Tempest and GRG — lowly, unsigned, talented trackers unknown in mainstream popularity. How many people dream of the “accidental discovery.” I know as a hobbyist actor I kind-of hope that one day someone will see me and say “Hey! I want that guy in my movie!” (I will even settle for a commercial!) So Tempest creates a piece of original track work, and maybe one day someone like Timbaland comes along as says “Yo, dawg, yo $h1+ is tight! I wanna take this to the top with some phat beats and vocals. What you say?”
Instead, he just flat-out steals it. He did not even bother to kiss them or leave a couple of bucks on the dresser.
My statement does not address the intricacies of the situation, GRG cover of the Tempest original, but the principle remains.
Anyway, she does not get it, and I am sure a lot of people do not get it either. Damn shame.
-
@LoadWB:
I hear ya man! I agree 100% with you. It doesn't take that much to be a nice guy, especially when you're in a position of "power" like this Timbaloney guy. And it will "earn" you a hell of a lot more. Like _real_ respect. He would have been trully "the top" if he had only "extended his hand". Heck, he'd even have all of the demo scene, part if not all of the retro scene and the SomethingAwefuls behind him!
But alas, integrity and civility is not something to be found easily in this world. :(
-
lol, from an amazon review of an album with the song in question:
"9.Do it-Another dance song. It's very cool and it kind of reminds me of a 80's song a bit."
-
Music Television News (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1550506/20070122/timbaland.jhtml)
Never realized I'd live to see the day they play chipmusic (or SID music) on MTV... :-P
-
Piru wrote:
Music Television News (http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1550506/20070122/timbaland.jhtml)
Never realized I'd live to see the day they play chipmusic (or SID music) on MTV... :-P
Oh my god! It's been 8 years since I heard them play a music video and now they are playing chiptunes. The sky is falling!
-
Timbaland et al are pretty smart not to say anything at this point, provided they (all involved) are not planning on settling amicably.
-
Timbaland comments the controversy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTvY3wZrHrQ) (Warning: This probably will raise your blood pressure)
update: text transcript (http://www.zxdemo.org/extra/timbaland_radio_transcript.txt) (for the Youtube impaired)
update2: fixed youtube URL to one without censorship
-
Piru wrote:
Timbaland comments the controversy (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATkHbfbQAc4) (Warning: This probably will raise your blood pressure)
update: text transcript (http://www.zxdemo.org/extra/timbaland_radio_transcript.txt) (for the Youtube impaired)
So, other than showing himself up to be a complete twat, he did actually admit he sampled it.
Therefore, I imagine his lawyers will be offering the original composer some poxy amount in sampling fees.
-
hmmmm i have never heard of any of the songs he performed or produced(and i listen to that style of music)it is amazing so many people think his stuff is great but relatively unheard on the radio(at least in my neck of the woods).
i really don't think of him as a big deal as others apparently do in the music biz.
-
jkirk wrote:
hmmmm i have never heard of any of the songs he performed or produced(and i listen to that style of music)it is amazing so many people think his stuff is great but relatively unheard on the radio(at least in my neck of the woods).
i really don't think of him as a big deal as others apparently do in the music biz.
Over here he has the public persona of some bloke who produces crappy popstars when they want to look ¨cool¨.
Hardly in Dre´s calibre!
-
update: text transcript (for the Youtube impaired)
Wow....er...."eloquently" argued by Timbaland. ;-)
-
You probably have heard his stuff, a lot of missy eliiots stuff has been produced by timeberland.
and no he is no where near Dr dre's standard.
How people can generalise about Hip hop or gangsta rap is above me.
Although a man of contridiction( spelling) ,if you listen to a lot of Tupacs tracks, there is a message and something to be understood about life in general and its associated struggles. The same can be said about DMX also.
There are rappers who only talk about Drugs and killing etc without any real message or hope for the future, Fiddy cent, the game, snoop etc.....
-
JJ wrote:
You probably have heard his stuff, a lot of missy eliiots stuff has been produced by timeberland.
and no he is no where near Dr dre's standard.
How people can generalise about Hip hop or gangsta rap is above me.
Although a man of contridiction( spelling) ,if you listen to a lot of Tupacs tracks, there is a message and something to be understood about life in general and its associated struggles. The same can be said about DMX also.
There are rappers who only talk about Drugs and killing etc without any real message or hope for the future, Fiddy cent, the game, snoop etc.....
For me HipHop died when they stopped using breaks.
Which is just about when DnB/Jungle nicely took over. :-)
-
CannonFodder wrote:
JJ wrote:
You probably have heard his stuff, a lot of missy eliiots stuff has been produced by timeberland.
and no he is no where near Dr dre's standard.
How people can generalise about Hip hop or gangsta rap is above me.
Although a man of contridiction( spelling) ,if you listen to a lot of Tupacs tracks, there is a message and something to be understood about life in general and its associated struggles. The same can be said about DMX also.
There are rappers who only talk about Drugs and killing etc without any real message or hope for the future, Fiddy cent, the game, snoop etc.....
For me HipHop died when they stopped using breaks.
Which is just about when DnB/Jungle nicely took over. :-)
Edit:
I´ll give Timbaland his dues, he did (IIRC) produce that Try Again track by Aaliyah.
Such a gorgeous filthy bassline. :-D
-
i found a listing here and i have heard 3-5 of them. that ain't much.
timbaland produced tracks (http://www.discogs.com/artist/Timbaland+timbaland+productions&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us)
How people can generalise about Hip hop or gangsta rap is above me.
human nature
country is generalized as beer and square dancin.
rock is generalized as sex&drug music as in sex,drugs and rocknroll
folk is generalized as being boring
classical is also generalized as being dead composer's music
rap is generalized as not real music meant for gangs
i usually just ignore it and go on. you will either like a style of music or not.
There are rappers who only talk about Drugs and killing etc without any real message or hope for the future, Fiddy cent, the game, snoop etc.....
this is true but i don't listen for a message. i listen for the bass track and rhythm. if it has a great message i like it more but i don't restrict my music to the message contained in the song. tho i prefer 80's and early 90's rap.
-
this is true but i don't listen for a message. i listen for the bass track and rhythm. if it has a great message i like it more but i don't restrict my music to the message contained in the song. tho i prefer 80's and early 90's rap.
A man of fine tastes! :-D
Did Drum & Bass/Jungle ever makes it´s way over to Georgia?
This is getting OT, but I shall PM you with some recommendations. :-)
-
Did Drum & Bass/Jungle ever makes it´s way over to Georgia?
if it did i didn't know it. sometimes here in the states the lesser known styles get lumped into the category that is most similar to it. for example miami bass and technobass gets lumped into hip hop since it is a much larger genre.
-
Maybe he should have listened better to his lawyers.
I am sorry, but the fan-kids will have to take a dive. First off, it was not "sampled," it was played in its entirety in a song which he claimed was his original creation. Secondly, his own industry calls this "theft," even though this is incorrect -- most honest professions would call what happened "plagiarism." He took someone else's work and claimed it as his own. I guess that this is okay if you are under a deadline to produce an album.
And his argument about what is public domain and what is not simply does not hold water. Again, his own industry says that if you are unclear as to the status of a piece of work, you should simply steer clear, erring on the side of not stepping over the boundary of the original author's rights.
"What's up" with these guys? No, Timblahland, what's up with you? This kind of arrogance alone merits punishment.
-
LoadWB wrote:
I am sorry, but the fan-kids will have to take a dive. First off, it was not "sampled," it was played in its entirety in a song which he claimed was his original creation.
I´ll have to disagree on this point.
A sample is a sample, there is no defined ¨industry standard sample lemgth¨. ISO-5AM9L3 perhaps? ;-)
-
Legal: Clear samples (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio1/onemusic/legal/samplep01.shtml)
It's a copyright infringement (infringing rights of both GRG and Tempest), and a obvious case of plagiarism (using the whole C64 version as the base of the "Block Party" ringtune and "Do it").
This is a particularily interesting point:
If the sample is used a lot
If the sample is extensive and underpins your tune to such an extent that the track won't really work without it, then you're in a weak bargaining position.
The other record company can demand a much higher royalty - as much as 50% in some cases.
The record Loose has 12 tracks,. "Do it" is one of them, that'd mean 1/24th of the profits. Loose has sold 3 million copies (early december 2006, so it's more by now).
So:
The potential cost of removing an uncleared sample once a record has been released is enormous and your bargaining position with the copyright owners is extremely weak.
They may sue for damages as well as demanding some or all of the profits from the record. They could obtain a court injunction preventing the record company from selling the record. If they succeeded in that, then your label would have to go to the time and expense of recalling any copies in the shops and re-pressing the record. The bill for all this lands in your lap.
-
The record Loose has 12 tracks,. "Do it" is one of them, that'd mean 1/24th of the profits. Loose has sold 3 million copies (early december 2006, so it's more by now).
Well, I can see Nelly Furtado personally suing the arse off Timbaland too for loss of earnings. :lol:
-
CannonFodder wrote:
The record Loose has 12 tracks,. "Do it" is one of them, that'd mean 1/24th of the profits. Loose has sold 3 million copies (early december 2006, so it's more by now).
Well, I can see Nelly Furtado personally suing the arse off Timbaland too for loss of earnings. :lol:
i'd bet nelly furtado didn't see any of the profis off the album.
-
cv643d wrote:
I dont think this guy is so involved. It is probably some of his employee who came up with some cool sounds, he is maybe involved in the demo scene himself, then he gives a new "beat" to timberland and he aproves it and stamps his name on the tune.
ZIP
:lol:
If was that T guy or an employee, that no matters: STEAL IS ROBBERY (and vice-versa :-D).
If T gay put his name on a thing, it belongs to him.
If he put his name on a stealed thing HE IS A THIEF! :pissed:
-
rkauer wrote:
cv643d wrote:
I dont think this guy is so involved. It is probably some of his employee who came up with some cool sounds, he is maybe involved in the demo scene himself, then he gives a new "beat" to timberland and he aproves it and stamps his name on the tune.
ZIP
:lol:
If was that T guy or an employee, that no matters: STEAL IS ROBBERY (and vice-versa :-D).
If T gay put his name on a thing, it belongs to him.
If he put his name on a stealed thing HE IS A THIEF! :pissed:
Sampling is not theft, it´s an art form.
Sampling without giving due credit is naughty.
What are your views on Danger Mouse´s Grey Album? Or anything by the Beastie Boys who hardly ever used to get their samples cleared.
-
I´ll have to disagree on this point. A sample is a sample, there is no defined ¨industry standard sample lemgth¨.
The very word "sample" means "a small bit". i.e. if you taste a little corner of a cake you are having a sample, but you cannot claim to still be "sampling" it if you eat the whole thing (like Timbaland did with Tempest's song).
-
jkirk wrote:
CannonFodder wrote:
The record Loose has 12 tracks,. "Do it" is one of them, that'd mean 1/24th of the profits. Loose has sold 3 million copies (early december 2006, so it's more by now).
Well, I can see Nelly Furtado personally suing the arse off Timbaland too for loss of earnings. :lol:
i'd bet nelly furtado didn't see any of the profis off the album.
Sell your soul to satan and reap the rewards! ;-)
-
My guess is that the T guy doesn't even know where Finland is. :lol:
What an idiot.
-
ral-clan wrote:
I´ll have to disagree on this point. A sample is a sample, there is no defined ¨industry standard sample lemgth¨.
The very word "sample" means "a small bit". i.e. if you taste a little corner of a cake you are having a sample, but you cannot claim to still be "sampling" it if you eat the whole thing (like Timbaland did with Tempest's song).
the meaning has since changed.
merium webster defines it (in this instance)as
3 : an excerpt from a musical recording that is used in another artist's recording
notice there is no length specified so a full song can also be considered a sample
-
ral-clan wrote:
I´ll have to disagree on this point. A sample is a sample, there is no defined ¨industry standard sample lemgth¨.
The very word "sample" means "a small bit". i.e. if you taste a little corner of a cake you are having a sample, but you cannot claim to still be "sampling" it if you eat the whole thing (like Timbaland did with Tempest's song).
No it does not mean ¨small bit¨.
Please explain how Danger Mouse Grey Album, which is made from 100% samples taken from the Beatles White Album to re-create Jay-Z´s Black album would fit into your myopic view of what sampling is.
edit:
Sampling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_%28music%29)!=sampling (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_sampling)
-
jkirk wrote:
ral-clan wrote:
I´ll have to disagree on this point. A sample is a sample, there is no defined ¨industry standard sample lemgth¨.
The very word "sample" means "a small bit". i.e. if you taste a little corner of a cake you are having a sample, but you cannot claim to still be "sampling" it if you eat the whole thing (like Timbaland did with Tempest's song).
the meaning has since changed.
merium webster defines it (in this instance)as
3 : an excerpt from a musical recording that is used in another artist's recording
notice there is no length specified so a full song can also be considered a sample
Agreed, I could take an entire song from an album, add vocals and maybe a few breaks, and some effects, and change the order of different sectios of the song.
It´s still sampling.
-
Danger Mouse Grey Album, which is made from 100% samples taken from the Beatles White Album to re-create Jay-Z´s Black album
excellent album btw :-)
-
merium webster defines it (in this instance)as
3 : an excerpt from a musical recording that is used in another artist's recording
And if you read carefully, that definition says EXCERPT. An excerpt as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary is:
A passage or segment taken from a longer work, such as a literary or musical composition, a document, or a film.
So if you take the WHOLE thing, you are not taking an EXCERPT, which is then not a SAMPLE. To SAMPLE something, you must take an EXCERPT, which is a PASSAGE or SEGMENT.
Otherwise, I could rip a whole 20 minute track off a BBC orchestra CD, add a vocal line or rythm track, and sell it as my own - arguing that I SAMPLED it. No...this is a re-mix, and if done without crediting and paying the original copyright holder it is plagiarism and theft.
-
jkirk wrote:
Danger Mouse Grey Album, which is made from 100% samples taken from the Beatles White Album to re-create Jay-Z´s Black album
excellent album btw :-)
Yeah, much better than the Black album too. :-)
-
Please explain how Danger Mouse Grey Album, which is made from 100% samples taken from the Beatles White Album to re-create Jay-Z´s Black album would fit into your myopic view of what sampling is.
edit: (Wikipedia link on sampling)
Sampling!=sampling
To use your own defence against you, the Wikipedia article you cite above says in the very first sentence:
"In music, sampling is the act of taking a portion, or sample, of one sound recording...".
and...
"Often "samples" consist of one part of a song, such as a break, used in another..."
The key word here being PORTION or PART. Not the entire track. If you take and entire song and just layer stuff on then that is then a re-mix.
The art of sampling is to use small snippets of audio and re-create an entirely new work. Much like how in collage artists use small scraps of images to create an entirely new piece of visual art. To paraphrase one YouTube pundit: to simply take an entire page out of a magazine, change it slightly and call it your own is plagiarism.
If the DANGER GREY MOUSE album you mention takes bits of the White Album and makes all new original works that don't mimic the original, then that I agree is SAMPLING. If it merely takes the unmodified tracks and layers stuff on top, that is NOT sampling, it is re-mixing.
Another trait of a talented sampling artist is that he or she takes their short samples from lots of different sources to assemble a single new, original sounding work. They don't simply plunder/sample a single song to create a new work.
-
ral-clan wrote:
Please explain how Danger Mouse Grey Album, which is made from 100% samples taken from the Beatles White Album to re-create Jay-Z´s Black album would fit into your myopic view of what sampling is.
edit: (Wikipedia link on sampling)
Sampling!=sampling
To use your own defence against you, the Wikipedia article you cite above says in the very first sentence:
"In music, sampling is the act of taking a portion, or sample, of one sound recording...".
and...
"Often "samples" consist of one part of a song, such as a break, used in another..."
The key word here being PORTION or PART. Not the entire track. If you take and entire song and just layer stuff on then that is then a re-mix.
Re-mixing and sampling are two sides of the same coin.
The art of sampling is to use small snippets of audio and re-create an entirely new work. Much like how in collage artists use small scraps of images to create an entirely new piece of visual art. To paraphrase one YouTube pundit: to simply take an entire page out of a magazine, change it slightly and call it your own is plagiarism.
Raving I´m Raving by Shut Up and Dance
Lamborghini by Shut and Dance
I could go on and on............
If the DANGER GREY MOUSE album you mention takes bits of the White Album and makes all new original works that don't mimic the original, then that I agree is SAMPLING. If it merely takes the unmodified tracks and layers stuff on top, that is NOT sampling, it is re-mixing.
Re-mixing is the art of taking samples from various sources to create a new song. Hmmm.... sounds familiar.
Another trait of a talented sampling artist is that he or she takes their short samples from lots of different sources to assemble a single new, original sounding work.
Take away the word ¨short¨ from that statement and I would agree with you.
They don't simply plunder/sample a single song to create a new work.
No one is denying that this is what Timbaland has done. Only you are looking for an argument where there isn´t one.
-
ral-clan wrote:
merium webster defines it (in this instance)as
3 : an excerpt from a musical recording that is used in another artist's recording
And if you read carefully, that definition says EXCERPT. An excerpt as defined by the American Heritage Dictionary is:
A passage or segment taken from a longer work, such as a literary or musical composition, a document, or a film.
So if you take the WHOLE thing, you are not taking an EXCERPT, which is then not a SAMPLE. To SAMPLE something, you must take an EXCERPT, which is a PASSAGE or SEGMENT.
and i suppose if you didn't sample the 1-2 sec silence at the end and beginning you would still say i didn't sample.
or maybe i sample the first and last half of the song thereby making two samples covering the entire piece.
Otherwise, I could rip a whole 20 minute track off a BBC orchestra CD, add a vocal line or rythm track, and sell as as my own - arguing that I SAMPLED it. No...this is a re-mix, and if done without crediting and paying the original copyright holder it is plagiarism and theft.
same goes for samples. you must clear the samples used with the copyright holders.
the difference here is he claims to have wrote the song despite 70-90% of it being sampled. he also acts as if he owes the authors nothing for usage which is also wrong. his sample argument doesn't hold water. in the case of the grey album the producer never intended to make a profit and said publically that he made tha album from the white album and the black album. he never tried to brush it under the carpet.
do you understand what the real issue is?
-
Re-mixing and sampling are two sides of the same coin.
I don't agree with this statement. Re-mixing can be totally unrelated to sampling. For instance: think of the latest re-mix of the Beatles album "Let It Be" called "Let It Be - Naked".
The producer George Martin took the original multi-track masters and re-mixed them. He changed the EQ and emphasis of some of the parts, turned up other parts that weren't as prominenent in the original mixes (i.e. Billy Preston's keyboard), and turned down or shut off other tracks (the Phil Spector orchestrations). The resulting tracks were the same length as the originals, but sounded different due the the "re-mix" on the board. I suppose you could also call what he did a re-master in some elements.
This, of course is an oversimplification of what he did, but my point is that the resulting tracks are re-mixes of the original. No sampling was involved.
This is close to what Timbaland did with Tempest's song. He basically took the whole thing and layered on top of it his own drums and Nellie's vocals. He turned down the original bass-line and added his own copy of it. I've heard a lot of people say that what he did is "sampling"....they argue this as some sort of defence for what he did (I know you're not saying this). But such a large, continuous use of an original tune doesn't fit any definition of sampling I've come across. To me it's closer to a re-mix.
That doesn't mean that re-mixing can't involve sampling as part of the re-mix "twist". The re-mixes of Bjork's songs (for instance by Moby and - er, I think - the Chemical Brothers) in many cases involved sampling. But sampling alone does not equal re-mix nor vice-versa. The two can be mutually exclusive.
I'm not trying to argue with you. I'm just trying to clear up some misconceptions about sampling etc. I've seen floating around on the 'net. While I'm not into rap or hip-hop, I've done a little bit of re-mixing and sampling. I'm NO professional, but I don't come into this discusssion from a totally uneducated standpoint about the two techniques.
Anyway, I guess we're on the same side and this has been argued out a lot. So I hope Tempest gets something for the re-mix Timbaland did of his song. Timbaland shouldn't be able to use the "fair use" sampling defence in this case because he didn't sample.
-
If it merely takes the unmodified tracks and layers stuff on top, that is NOT sampling, it is re-mixing.
i missed this.
remixing can be what you say but this is not set in stone. a remix can have no portion of the original song but the lyrics. it could be recreated from samples or any number of styles. there is no standard remix style or limit to how much of the original song has to be included. this merely states the intention to take a song and remix it.
btw you must sample the song before you can remix the song unless you intend to do away with all the original aspects of the song.
-
I don't agree with this statement. Re-mixing can be totally unrelated to sampling. For instance: think of the latest re-mix of the Beatles album "Let It Be" called "Let It Be - Naked".
The producer George Martin took the original multi-track masters and re-mixed them. He changed the EQ and emphasis of some of the parts, turned up other parts that weren't as prominenent in the original mixes (i.e. Billy Preston's keyboard), and turned down or shut off other tracks (the Phil Spector orchestrations). The resulting tracks were the same length as the originals, but sounded different due the the "re-mix" on the board. I suppose you could also call what he did a re-master in some elements.
So George Martin taking the original tape reals and putting them onto a different medium is not sampling in your book?
-
So George Martin taking the original tape reals and putting them onto a different medium is not sampling in your book?
When you're burning a copy of a CD in your computer or ripping it to your I-pod, do you tell people you are making a "sample"?
No. In George Martin's case I'd have to say that what he did is just archiving or making a transfer recording so he could start the re-mix process. In fact, there's already a word for this action in audio/video tech circles - it's called a 'dub'.
A sample, to me, is a snippet or phrase of audio which can then be be used as a musical instrument in its own right.
i.e. a drum loop, or a brass hit, or a 1 or 2 bar bass phrase, or a James Brown "Yeeeahh!". That sort of thing.
Otherwise, I could call the entire contents of a CD a "sample", the entire contents of my i-pod a "sample" or a whole library's audio section a "sample". The work "sample" just gets watered down and meaningless if it is given no boundaries.
-
ral-clan wrote:
So George Martin taking the original tape reals and putting them onto a different medium is not sampling in your book?
When you're burning a copy of a CD in your computer or ripping it to your I-pod, do you tell people you are making a "sample"?
No, because I am not creating a new piece of music.
No. In George Martin's case I'd have to say that what he did is just archiving or making a transfer recording. In fact, there's already a word for this action in audio/video tech circles - it's called a 'dub'.
A sample, to me, is a snippet or phrase of audio which can then be be used as a musical instrument in its own right.
To you it may be that, but to millions more it doesn´t. Majority rules, you know that.
i.e. a drum loop, or a brass hit, or a 1 or 2 bar bass phrase, or a James Brown "Yeeeahh!". That sort of thing.
Otherwise, I could call the entire contents of a CD a "sample", the entire contents of my i-pod a "sample" or a whole library's audio section a "sample". The work "sample" just gets watered down and meaningless if it is given no boundaries.
Please use a p2p app and get hold of ¨Raving I´m Raving¨ by Shut Up and Dance, then get hold of ¨Walking In Memphis¨.
Please listen to both then tell me what you think SUAD did to make ¨Raving I´m Raving¨.
-
It will be difficult for me to get the songs you suggested, although I'm very curious to hear them (I only have dial up).
When you're burning a copy of a CD in your computer or ripping it to your I-pod, do you tell people you are making a "sample"?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, becasue I am not creating a new piece of music.
So the very act of George transferring the old fragile multi-track reels to a hard-disc so he would then have something to work from is sampling then? I think that's a bit of a stretch. It's not like he was going to cut or paste phrases from the digitized tracks....
To you it may be that, but to millions more it doesn´t. Majority rules, you know that.
I don't know if Majority Rules is valid indicator of how true things are. If public belief makes things true, then Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and Celine Dion is a good singer and the world was once flat.
If you're talking about majority rules, I think most people out there would agree with me that this was simply a digital transfer for backup purposes. I think I'd be hard-pressed to find a single studio tech who though he or she was "sampling" (in the hip-hop sense of the word) by transferring old reels to hard drive for a remix/remastering job.
Based on most of the feedback and outrage I've seen on forums about this Timbaland controversy, I'd say that my definition of what sample vs. a rip is shared by a lot of people out there. :-)
-
ral-clan wrote:
It will be difficult for me to get the songs you suggested, although I'm very curious to hear them (I only have dial up).
When you're burning a copy of a CD in your computer or ripping it to your I-pod, do you tell people you are making a "sample"?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, becasue I am not creating a new piece of music.
So the very act of George transferring the old fragile multi-track reels to a hard-disc so he would then have something to work from is sampling then? I think that's a bit of a stretch. It's not like he was going to cut or paste phrases from the digitized tracks....
To you it may be that, but to millions more it doesn´t. Majority rules, you know that.
If you're talking about majority rules, I think most people out there would agree with me that this was simply a digital transfer for backup purposes. I think I'd be hard-pressed to find a single studio tech who though he or she was "sampling" (in the hip-hop sense of the word) by transferring old reels to hard drive for a remix/remastering job.
Based on most of the feedback and outrage I've seen on forums about this Timbaland controversy, I'd say that my definition of what sample vs. a rip is shared by a lot of people out there.
Mostly the opinions of people without knowledge of music technology and terminology. So yes, the majority would probably agree with you.
Ask the opinion of people who do have such knowledge and the answer would be different.
Raving I´m Raving (http://www.backtotheoldskool.co.uk/raving_im_raving.htm)
The WMA link is broken, streaming RealAudio version here (http://www.backtotheoldskool.co.uk/audio/raving_im_raving.ram)
Should be ok on dialup.
-
Mostly the opinions of people without knowledge of music technology and terminology. So yes, the majority would probably agree with you.
Well, I'm not trying to toot my own horn, but I have worked semi-professionally in independant music for the past 15 years and do have some small degree of experience in music recording studios and doing live sound...I also maintain a small home recording studio. So I wouldn't exactly call my opinion "without knowledge".
I've not met a tech who would use the word 'sampling' to describe doing an analogue to digital backup.
On a totally technical level, the computer is breaking up any audio into miniscule digital samples (16-bit 44.1Khz or 24-bit 96Khz) in order to digitize it....but you don't call making a copy "sampling", and even this use of the word sampling is distanced from the term as hip-hop artists use it.
Any A/V professionals out there who would use this terminology?
Anyway, I guess we've probably argued this out as far as we can take it: Timbaland bad, Tempest good. We both agree on that.
Thanks for the links. I'll check them out when I'm home.
-
Maybe Mr T should try like any other artist/songwriter try to invent/write his own Music --> like this young does !Aaron Slater (http://www.aaronslater.com/index.php)
But I think in the USA they don't like it because it;s to honest. Real music doesn't count. "Hip Hop are you being robed" is more like it. :-D :-? :-D :-? 8-)
-
So the very act of George transferring the old fragile multi-track reels to a hard-disc so he would then have something to work from is sampling then? I think that's a bit of a stretch. It's not like he was going to cut or paste phrases from the digitized tracks....
uh ripping is copying a digitalsong from a cd.
sampling is recording a digital file from an analogsource. this can also apply to using digital files in such a way to create a song.
Based on most of the feedback and outrage I've seen on forums about this Timbaland controversy, I'd say that my definition of what sample vs. a rip is shared by a lot of people out there.
the outrage has nothing to do with the definition of a sample or a ripped file and you know it. he didn't ask permission to use the file. he didn't pay royalties. he didn't credit the origial authors. and he still tried to claim it was his work even though it was obvious he didn't do it.
-
Splitting hairs over semantics is always fun.
-
uh ripping is copying a digitalsong from a cd.
sampling is recording a digital file from an analogsource. this can also apply to using digital files in such a way to create a song.
Sorry man, but sampling is taking audio from any source (digital or analog). The very Wikipedia article you guys referred me to states that the earliest samplers were doing everything in the 1950s/60s with analog tape. (analog to analog). Today, a lot of people sample from both analog and digital sources.
the outrage has nothing to do with the definition of a sample or a ripped file and you know it.
I'm not sure you understand my original point. I'm sorry if I haven't made myself clear. What I was trying to point out is the fact that a lot of people (Timbaland included) are trying to defend what he did by saying Tempest was merely sampled. By this logic, if Timbaland only SAMPLED Tempest then this somehow falls under fair use, and he did nothing wrong. The point I'm trying to make is that, because Timbaland used the ENTIRE Tempest song as the basis for his "Do It", this is not sampling, but actually a rip/remix. A lot of people are outraged because of this thin defence and broad misuse of the term "sampling" to disguise what he did.
Anyway, as another poster pointed out, argueing semantics is pointless. It's up for the courts to decide. So I guess that's the last I have to say on the issue. You guys have a great day and all the best!
:-)
-
ral-clan wrote:
uh ripping is copying a digitalsong from a cd.
sampling is recording a digital file from an analogsource. this can also apply to using digital files in such a way to create a song.
Sorry man, but sampling is taking audio from any source (digital or analog). The very Wikipedia article you guys referred me to states that the earliest samplers were doing everything in the 1950s/60s with analog tape. (analog to analog). Today, a lot of people sample from both analog and digital sources.
this is true but in today's society this is not a commonly used method. as for sampling digital files you missed part of my post.
this can also apply to using digital files in such a way to create a song
though in the most strict terms it is taking a part of music for use in another song. it is also a term used to describe the transfer of music from analog to digital. the transfer of digital to digital is best described as ripping since the sampling process is not being used.
What I was trying to point out is the fact that a lot of people (Timbaland included) are trying to defend what he did by saying Tempest was merely sampled. By this logic, if Timbaland only SAMPLED Tempest then this somehow falls under fair use, and he did nothing wrong.
actually sampling don't get you a get out of jail free card when it comes to this. he can use "clear" samples but not any sample. a clear sample is a sample from a pd recording from a pd arrangement. since both are public domain there is noone to pay. since this was not a pd performance or a pd arrangement any sampling excuse is just that an excuse. Read the page piru linked to it spells the law out pretty well.
-
I have to agree that the issue of symantecs is definitely a grueling point over this issue.
So...
Timbaland did not sample Tempest's song, he ripped it.
Timbaland did not steal the song, he used it without permission.
Timbaland did not write the song, he plagiarised the original.
Timbaland is not a thief, he is plagiarist.
Timbaland is not creative, he is a con man.
And it was not a video game, jerk, it was a real song.
Timbaland took someone else's work, slapped his name on it and profited from the deception.
Even so, the comment about taking it from a video game is a slap in the face of musicians who create music for video games. Look at some of the great music from games in the Amiga past: Shadow of the Beast, The Killing Game Show, Silkworm, and I'm sure plenty of people have their favorites (my favorite from the PC is Incoming.) I have a couple of CDs of game sountracks, my favorite being "Robotech: Invasion."
Timbaland is also an arrogant a$$.
-
Timbaland did not sample Tempest's song, he ripped it.
i can agree with everything except the line quoted above since we don't really know how the song was converted. if there was a conversion prog that he would know about then yes it was ripped. however if he played it from a c64 and captured it then it was sampled. since we don't know the method used we will never know what it was.
-
@jkirk
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/2774/sidstationeh4.jpg
While he could have used other means to "grab" the original, you'd imagine sidstation was what he used.
And how is conversion ripping while recording off some HW isn't? So to avoid being called a ripper you just need to replay the module thru some player and record the output? Sorry, this does not compute.
He recorded the original track, removed the drums and added some bass, drums and lyrics. This is ripping, clear and simple, regardless of the physical method of obtaining the original audio data.
-
I wonder...
TechWeb: Timbaland To Release First Mobile Album On V-Cast (http://www.informationweek.com/internet/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=206107095)
-
I was wondering what happened to all this. Let resurrect this thread so I can find out. :-D
-
I just did. For better or for worse :crazy:
-
It all comes down to whether you work in the industry or not, if you don't then that track stored on your computer is theft, if you have a recording contract, then it is a sample.
There was a long argument over how long a sample can be, now all IP, music, film, video, designs, etc, are all protected with ruthless efficiency, so if we want to find a legal limit on the length of a sample, let some programmers "sample" some microsoft code, then we will have our answer.
-
Well as a producer in the hardcore breaks scene I gotta make a comment about this, I heard the two tunes and first of he did not sample - he ripped it, sampling is taking a sound and remaking it into a new sound ... at least in most producers books. Now all he did was to put some beats over the original tune and some vocals, now that is called a REMIX, he did a bloody remix and called it his own original tune.
He a is lying, tone deaf piece of sh*te, where as most other producers have the simple manners to either ask or to say the tune is a remix of another one. Sorry if I seem a bit pissed off but if I have had this happen to me before, I had worked on some tunes for 4 months and some bugger took them remixed them and called them his original tune. No way should he get away with this and I hope that he gets burned - just because we are not famous does not mean that we should allow the big guys to bugger us.
Phew! Almost broke the keyboard with this post. :madashell:
-
timbaland is a {bleep}ing {bleep}!
sampling music to make new music has been going since the 60s and has been very sucseful, its ok when its popular/classic songs that people have heard becuase it is clear that he didnt compose the origional music and that the origional artist would still get some kind of credit.
BUT i think it is wrong that he is sampling music from the underground demoscene because people might think that he has composed the background music himself!