Conference marvin::uk_music

    Is the intro to the Fleetwood Mac single "Tell Me Lies" lifted from
    Mark Knopfler's Local Hero album?
    
    Dougie
    

Dougie

Sampling isn't simply theft.  Only when blatent samples of other's work 
could be called so.  Sampling sounds, be they a glass smashing or a cow
farting, into a keyboard would not be.  Unless cows have copyright!

Fleetwood sampling others?  Interesting,  not the obvious samplers are they!


David

    David,
    
    The (now modified) title was based on a very interesting radio program
    I heard about 6 months ago. In it, a lawyer stated categorically that
    "Sampling is Theft". It's a pity the interviewer didn't ask him if that
    included farting cows, the answer might have been interesting!
    
    In the current chart climate any group releasing a single
    containing such a sample (!) would go straight to No. 1.
    
    Dougie
    

    >Unless cows have copyright!
    
    Err, you'll have ask Kim Wilde that yourself Dave. Tee Hee!
    
    barry.               

oh right, I'm with you Dougie.

What was the outcome of it?  

It's not always clearcut is it.  Do the laws have to modify themselves to 
take into account new technology I wonder?  

I mean, a "nano-second" sample of an other bands sound is different to swiping
whole riffs off another band.  Now if it were just a copy not a sample I'd
say who has the right to claim a riff?  I'm NOT talking about bars worth of 
music here.

Remember Phil Collins trying to sue someone for nicking just the drum sound off
one of his.  That's a tad petty for someone of his position to worry about a 
young band having the same drum sound as he.  I was in a group at the time so 
we got hold of a load of his albums and sampled our heads off on principle
and "giggle value".  Good sounds Phil!

I saw the chart show this weekend and agree about your comment on releasing
a "cow track", cow shed ,, Shed Music!!!  Where's me sampler.


David

� we got hold of a load of his albums and sampled our heads off on principle
� and "giggle value".  

    	I'm intrigued. What principle is that?

    	Ian.

    Sampling sounds is IMHO okay. Myself and a friend once spent a weekend
    trying to get a sound like Jon Lord's Hammond using a synth, before
    giving up and sampling the bugger. Ditto Kieth Emerson's brass sound.
    
    But sampling entire chunks of other people's songs is a different
    kettle of fish. I guess the same issue surrounds a lot of pop art, or
    Andy Warhol's use of Coke cans in his pictures. Is it art or ripoff ?
    Done well, a track could use a lot of samples of other songs and stand
    on its own merits as a creditable piece of music. Alternatively, you
    can have the situation that predominates at the moment, loadsa samples
    resulting in zilch quality. I suppose it is just too easy to rip off
    somebody elses work if you're a lazy, talentless, money grabbing twonk.
    
    Bottom line is that it was alright when only sounds were nicked, but
    now... Gag!
    
    Balders

    
    Did that Ice-thingy bloke ever have to pay Queen and David Bowie any
    royalties based on his number one record 'sampled' from
    'under-pressure'
    
    Paul

Re: 0

Next weeks number one sampling Mark Cohn's "Walking in Memphis".

KLF sampling crowd noise off The Doors Live on The White Room. They should have 
played a gig of their own.

+Mark+

Ian

The principle of nothing more than, "he doesn't want people to do it so 
let's do it."

Nothing heavy.

David-who never did as he was told.

    Basically you only have to look at the current scene to establish the
    impact of sampling.  With virtually everyone in the whole world now
    owning an Akai S1000 then it has become so easy to lift passages form
    records and use them as your own.  The first couple of people that did
    it had discovered a new thing,  and consequently several good sounds
    came out.  Jive Bunny really screwed everything up,  although I do
    believe that they paid for the use of the songs.  Now a days with such
    shit as Two Unlimited and co.  the use of samplers has reached epedemic
    proportions. You buy your drum tracks on a cd,  buy you brass riffs, 
    buy your voice samples and bobs you uncle.  One hit single.  Just look
    at how they play the keyboards on TOTP.  It isn't with grace and
    knowledge,  but with unease and panic.  And they aren't even playing
    the songs  they are just pretending to hit a few keys.  Basically it
    isn't even the right chord shapes,  because they buy chords ready made. 
    If they do stick their own chord in it's just a tonic triad and it
    never alters from that.
    
    I'm sorry,  I used to play around for hours with samplers,  but now I
    won't give them a second look due to the stigma that goes with them.
    
    
    Nigel 

� Next weeks number one sampling Mark Cohn's "Walking in Memphis".
    
    Does anyone know who perpetrated this crime. I've only caught this one
    once, and that was one time too many. As good an advert for making
    sampling illegal as anything I've heard recently.
    
    Balders

>                    <<< Note 1027.8 by BLKPUD::WATTERSONP >>>
>
>    
>    Did that Ice-thingy bloke ever have to pay Queen and David Bowie any
>    royalties based on his number one record 'sampled' from
>    'under-pressure'
 
This is the one that did it for me, and started making me more aware of
sampling. I like Under Pressure, and it grated on me enormously whenever I
heard Ice T track.

RE: The lawyer on the Radio program. One of the distinctions made is
between identifiable, or un-identifiable sampling. As someone has pointed
out, a nanosecond sample is going to be difficult to spot.

Some of the 'musicians' who were also on the program were a bit of a pain.
The one's who I found most palatable were those who admitted it was all a
bit cheeky, and if found out they paid the original artist. It was the
angst-ridden youths who tried to justify it as artistic right who got on my
nerves.

Apparantly the most sampled artist is James Brown; his bass line is in
loads of record - and he has his lawyers on the job all the time. He
doesn't mind his records being sampled, but he makes sure he gets paid for
it.

Annie Lennox; 'There must be an Angel' intro, I heard that sampled
recently. I've never heard a sample I liked.

Dougie

.1>    Is the intro to the Fleetwood Mac single "Tell Me Lies" lifted from
.1>    Mark Knopfler's Local Hero album?

Er... who cares?

Sampling is like anything else, good if done with wit and intelligence, bad
otherwise. There's loads of stuff I like that uses samples. For example,
Carter USM have used Michael Caine's voice in a few of their songs ("Shadows?
Shadows on me lungs?") to excellent effect. On the other hand, 
ice-vanilla-thing basing a whole track on the 'under pressure' riff, which
also provided the only fragment of tunefulness, was exceedingly naff.

Warhol and pop-art is a good analogy. A Campbell's soup tin was and isn't an
art object, yet he created something that was definitely was artistic, for its
attitude as much as anything. Good use of sampling can do the same thing with
old songs. After all, if I wanted to listen to old songs in the original I
could tune in to Capital Gold or some other radio station aimed at OAPs. But
I don't want to do that, I'd rather hear what's happening now.


Rod

    
    Sampling a section of one artist work and using it in another
    unconnected work ( I use the term loosly ) is painfully obviously 
    taking the pee. Sampling a sound , train, door knocker whatever is 
    a totally different story and ok in my book. I don't find it
    entertaining , even vaigley, to listen to a mish-mash of other people's
    work. Sampling a section of a song and using it with the original
    artists concent ( with some recompence ) is more acceptable , only
    slightly.  
    
    At one time using something that sounded like someone else's music with 
    different words was a crime. Now days it seems the any tecno weenie can
    rip off who they feel and get away with it , quoting it as artistic
    interpretation , or any other crap they wish to come out with. 
    
    That kind of use of sampled sound is about as acceptable to me as
    farting on a crowded underground train. quite frankly the practice
    stinks. (pun intended)
    
    
    	Garry

>RE: -1, -2

I agree, sampling is fine and can lead to extremely rare forms of music to
enjoy - but simply ripping riffs and drums and mashing them together is really
out of order. I remember watching a program documentary where a sampling wizard
put together a potential number 1 hit (no joke) in just 30 minutes from a
selection of ready-made tapes and discs.

However, on the other hand - film/noise samples are what make some groups
what they are (e.g. the Industrail bands, Skinny Puppy being a prime example
of the lavish use of film samples for effect)... also Fields of the Nephilim
have used samples from many atmospheric films to great effect (e.g. The Name
Of the Rose w/ monks chanting, eerie water dripping etc.). Having said this,
they are purely guitar-based and don't rip of everyone elses "music" - I do
see that as "some" form of theft.

But how to enforce the restriction of one and not the other!? ;-\

								- JIM CAD*

Re: 12

The act is Shut Up And Dance

>Annie Lennox; 'There must be an Angel' intro, I heard that sampled
>recently.

    The X-Sample - Dreamin' (on Burystead road)

    
    Going back over some of the early replies I noticed many refrences to
    anotomical sounds emenating from cows and the copyright there of.
    
    Has anyone ever heard a Roger Waters al'bum called 'Music From The
    Body'. Who would want to own to copyright the sounds on the first
    track.
    
    
    	As for copyright on pure sound , must be difficult to prove. My
    guess is that the sound would have to matched exactly on some form or
    oscillascope or sound analyzer, to prove that the wave forms were
    exactly that same and that sound B was sampled from sound A. Copyright
    infringments could only ever apply to the works not just simply a
    specific sound. Or could it.
    
    Garry
    

    
    The Utah Saints new tune "Something Good" samples Kate Bush
    with her song "Cloudbusting". Watch out for this one in
    next weeks 40.
    
    

    What are we arguing about here, sampling, or copyright infringement?

    I often take samples from records and experiment at home for my own
    amusement. You know those records where you go 'listen here, theres
    a good funky bit' and you wish it had gone on a bit longer... well 
    sampling allows you to achieve that particular prolonged ecstacy. 

    I'm not sure why artists complain about people sampling their stuff
    anyway, its more airplay for them after all. It probably boosts sales
    of the originals. (Sampling a whole song would be excessive though)

    Dave

    I remember quite a few years ago Depeche Mode sampled Cameo's
    "Word Up" On there single "Strange Love" this was never released
    as Cameo were threatening to sue, There were quite a few copy's 
    pressed and its worth quite a Bit if you can get your hands on 
    a copy, This was in the early days of sampling.

    Just thought I would share this useless information with you.
    
    
    Steve.

      <<< Note 1027.21 by XSTACY::PATTISON "I will tell you this, boy" >>>
                              -< Fuss over what? >-

>    I'm not sure why artists complain about people sampling their stuff
>    anyway, its more airplay for them after all. It probably boosts sales
>    of the originals. (Sampling a whole song would be excessive though)

Many don't, for the reasons you give. I suppose it depends on whether the
original artist likes the group doing the sampling, and what they have done
with the sample. With the Eurythmics (Annie Lennox) sample; Lennox wanted
to sue but Dave Stewart realised that he could make a bob or two from the
royalties of the new record. 

I think if it were me, it would depend on whether I liked the end result. 

dougie

    I heard Marc Cohn on Radio 1 the other day saying that he really hates
    the "new" version of Walking In Memphis.  He heard about it through his
    record company and was interested in hearing what he thought would be a
    cover version... and boy was he disappointed!  He has allowed them to
    release it but only for a week, and the profits have to go to his
    chosen charity, which incidentally raises money for young people from 
    disadvantaged backgrounds to get into the music business.
    
    Personally I hate it,  - completely uncreative mindless drivel.
    

    ...reminds me of what happened two months ago here in Holland. A Rave
    record was made out of O Fortuna, a classic piece by Carl Orff. The guy is
    no longer alive, but his family did not like the record. They refused to
    take the money, and the record had to be withdrawn from the shops. It
    reached number one in the sales charts a week before that happened....

    The thing about using music that you buy from publishers is totally
    diff.
    
    If the band just sampled a recording of it,  then not only will the
    publishers be pissed off, but the conductor and arranger (probably one
    and the same).
    
    P.S.  O Fortuna is a Great Piece from Carmina Birana. (sp?)  That is
    based on loads of poems and songs found written in Latin  German  etc.
    
    Go out and buy a classical version of it.   It launched a thousand surf
    boards ....
    

           <<< Note 1027.26 by PEKING::BARKERN "A Four Foot Prune" >>>

>    P.S.  O Fortuna is a Great Piece from Carmina Birana. (sp?) 

Yeah - I had some at the local Indian the other night there. Hot Stuff.

dougie

    

>           <<< Note 1027.20 by MASALA::GBROWN "The rhythm is hot" >>>
>                             -< Remember them..? >-
>
>    
>    The Utah Saints new tune "Something Good" samples Kate Bush
>    with her song "Cloudbusting". Watch out for this one in
>    next weeks 40.
 
I heard this on Saturday for the first time. It has to be the biggest load
of steaming gobshite I've heard for a long time. 

How has Katie reacted to the song? does she love it or hate it?

Paco Man
 

    Most of the song is OK except for the twat yelling "Utah Saints" every so
    often.

    Naff or what?

    Jane.

.     <<< Note 1027.29 by ARRODS::WHITEHEADJ "Why's everybody SHOUTING?" >>>
.
.    Most of the song is OK except for the twat yelling "Utah Saints" every so
.    often.
 
Don't you mean "Yoo ta Saints! Yoo! Yoo! Yoo! Yoo! TA! Saints!"

I endured this again yesterday. There is NOTHING on this track! The Bush
sample is played for about 80% of the record, with the yooyooyootasaints
making up the rest of the vocals. Add a drum machine and you've got a no.
1. God its depressing.

dougie

Hi Dougie,

I'll have to tape you my latest CURRENT 93 CD - "Thunder Perfect Mind", it's 
certainly different. Sometimes beautiful, sometimes melancholic, but always a
refreshing change from the norm. Boy have they changed - I never thought I'd
call C93 "beautiful" :-)

								- JIM CAD*