Ambient Music + Copyright

[El culto]

As it seems that this issue needs to be discussed more into detail, i thought to open a new thread.

Especially this statement I find on the edge of respecting other artists work:

in this sound style... the tolerance is higher then for other music for sure…..

A lot of music i sample based and are using sampling all the time, hip hop for instance, the genre would not exist if it wasn't for sampling or stealing,   but as long as you do something artistic with it,  or put it in a new context I think it is creative..
Also I think it depends on what is being sampled, a melody  for instance... but even with that you should not have alone rights on a melody just because some one was first, if some mind can come up with a melody I am sure another mind can come up with the same with time,   Also a samples used but put in a different context or music style I think is a way of using it artistically..
I just do not think all this commercial bullshit should interfere with the artistic output, let the music be free,

It clearly suggests that using other artists music is OK as long as you make something "new" out of it, no matter if you have the permission to do so. Such kind of statement made me think of just 2 possible explanations:

1. the author just want to excuse and justify those usage for whatever reason

2. the author donīt know about any legal terms

Greetings,
Tomas

[Ekstasis]

I think it is on case to case basis really, the line can be thin, it is a grey area..
I think the right person should deserve the "honour" for the work,  I think it all depends on the music
and what is being sampled and in what context.   I have not heard the A/B comparisons of the albums that made you kick Matthias Grassow out from your label,  as I said I think it should be examined on a case to case basis, it is all about who deserve the honour, it is very hard to generalize  since each context of music is so different...
I think sampling can be done in an artistic creative way,  but where the artist still get the honour but it can also be used in a more ruthless way, it all depends on the music in all honesty. 

I am not the person who want to patent every melody in the world or any sound I want the music to be free, I Do not care about the commercial factor , I only care about the honour, that the creator gets the honour. 
If you use longer segments and samples it might not hurt to write that in linear notes or something on the album..

You are a label owner so I understand the financial factor is very important for you, so I think we have very different philosophy regarding this topic, for me music is just an ocean, made by our consciousness,
if you sample some one else I suggest you do it in an honourably way  with respect for the artist,  if you just copy some one else work without no artistic modification it is of course ruthless and tasteless. But it all depends on what being sampled..as I said..the assessment should be done on a case to case basis.
I do not agree with the Law book on this, and what you did write about how it in Germany where 2 seconds is enough is just a big joke if you ask me, then they see the music only from a monetary perspective.

[Paul Vnuk (Ma Ja Le)]

I think the issue of sampling comes down to 2 things,

1: If you use a sample from an already existing work then you credit & COMPENSATE the creator and the source
2 : Create your OWN sound sources

Seams simple to me

[El culto]

I think the issue of sampling comes down to 2 things,

1: If you use a sample from an already existing work then you credit & COMPENSATE the creator and the source
2 : Create your OWN sound sources

Seams simple to me

Agreed!

But a credit in some cases is NOT enough if you donīt have the permission!

[LNerell]

1: If you use a sample from an already existing work then you credit & COMPENSATE the creator and the source

I think you need to go a step beyond this, please ask first.    Don't just assume that someone will let you use their art anyway you feel fit, it doesn't work like that.

[El culto]

1: If you use a sample from an already existing work then you credit & COMPENSATE the creator and the source

I think you need to go a step beyond this, please ask first.    Don't just assume that someone will let you use their art anyway you feel fit, it doesn't work like that.

+1

[Ekstasis]

I did write a long well written post to paul...and I did accidentally  remove  it..I clearly have no energy to rewrite it now but tomorrow.. I really hate when that Happen so frustrating...  I did hit ctrl +a and then I did paste a link and the text was gone...  ctrl + z did not work unfortunately.

[El culto]

I did write a long well written post to paul...and I did accidentally  remove  it..I clearly have no energy to rewrite it now but tomorrow.. I really hate when that Happen so frustrating...  I did hit ctrl +a and then I did paste a link and the text was gone...  ctrl + z did not work unfortunately.

Well you just selected all  For the future maybe learn another key command like ctrl+c

[Ekstasis]

I did write a long well written post to paul...and I did accidentally  remove  it..I clearly have no energy to rewrite it now but tomorrow.. I really hate when that Happen so frustrating...  I did hit ctrl +a and then I did paste a link and the text was gone...  ctrl + z did not work unfortunately.

Well you just selected all  For the future maybe learn another key command like ctrl+c

Yeah sucks..
I know I use the logitech k810 keyboard it is a quite small keyboard, so it quite easy to hit that ctrl +A combination cause they way I let my hand rest on the keyboard.

[Paul Vnuk (Ma Ja Le)]

1: If you use a sample from an already existing work then you credit & COMPENSATE the creator and the source

I think you need to go a step beyond this, please ask first.    Don't just assume that someone will let you use their art anyway you feel fit, it doesn't work like that.

I absolutely agree!!! I think that somewhere in my thought process was that if you credit and compensate the original artist that there would have been first contact and permission.   

[Paul Vnuk (Ma Ja Le)]

I should also mention that when we are talking about sampling another artists work I am assuming that we are talking about lifting things off of previously released works of art from albums or film. Commercially released loop libraries of course are fair game :-)

I should also clarify that I do understand to a certain point why the hip-hop generation went and sampled famous bits and pieces from old vinyl or famous songs, I get that from a novelty and interest standpoint.

However I don't understand why in the electronic music genre someone would need to lift an atmosphere or a drum groove etc. That seems like laziness, and yet I know it happens.

[hdibrell]

However I don't understand why in the electronic music genre someone would need to lift an atmosphere or a drum groove etc. That seems like laziness, and yet I know it happens.

Exactly!

[petekelly]

Personally, I baulk at the idea of sampling someone else's work (irregardless of genre), I just don't see the point. However, 'sampling' your own sounds and using them in something like Kontakt (for example), is a creative endeavour I'm all for.

For me, using commercially available loop libraries etc. completely unaltered, is something I also don't see the appeal of (from a purely artistic point of view) either.

[mgriffin]

To me, it's one thing to sample from a completely different genre or style, and repurpose what you've sampled for a completely different kind of work. I mean, if I take a voice sample from Blade Runner and put it in a trance song, it's not so much about ripping off. It's just sampling... quoting, sort of. This seems like less of a problem to me.

If you're an ambient musician creating drone work, and you take a large section of another ambient artist's drone and make it the basis for your own track, that's entirely different. To me that's just laziness, a terrible, lame shortcut... and much more like stealing or at least dishonesty, even if you credit it. You're using the person's work for something very much like the original work, barely changing it, certainly not repurposing it or creating something very new/different from it.

And yes, loop libraries or commercial sample packs are totally different. Those are sold with the express purpose of being used in other people's work.

[Ekstasis]

I think the issue of sampling comes down to 2 things,

1: If you use a sample from an already existing work then you credit & COMPENSATE the creator and the source
2 : Create your OWN sound sources

Seams simple to me

As I said earlier I did write a quite long post yesterday and did delete it by misstake... It takes 10x times amount of energy to write it again.

What I wanted to say was that I think you have a quite conservative view, in all honesty I think it is all a big mistake to generalize they way you do, you sound more like a lawyer actually.   I think you might do it very easy for yourself to say it as easy as that as credit and compensate the creator, I think if you have that mindset I think you are not open enough to realize a lot of people do a lot of different kinds of music and create it in different ways,  just because you do not like using others music to sample does not mean that other do. It is just my main problem you generalize it too much.  It is all on case to case basis..

Any sound can be taken and transformed into your own, that itself is an art.
With your opinion it is almost like saying to a painter that he must use his own made paint to paint his art.
The sound can be seen as an colour and can be painted into a new artwork in endless variations.

Regarding creating your own sound sources,  is this a rule ? or just your opinion,
Not all people are able to get all the sound sources they want..  The sound is just the colour..
that can be painted in endless variations,  not all people have the ability to record for instance field recordings, so why not take some recorded already of some natural elements and form and shape to your own art.

I think this conservative view you have and also the lawyers in the world will hurt the musical development...

Regarding Hip hop there is no accident that it is not as vinyl/sample based any more, especially not the most popular hip, it is cause they get lawyers after them for ever single second they sample.
Personally I have no interest in synth based Hip hop, it should be done the old school way with vinyl and sampling that is the essence of the art.

What do these lawyers care about is it the musical development from a mankind perspective or is just to collect money and prevent musical creations.  I really hate this monetary aspect.

[Ekstasis]

To me, it's one thing to sample from a completely different genre or style, and repurpose what you've sampled for a completely different kind of work. I mean, if I take a voice sample from Blade Runner and put it in a trance song, it's not so much about ripping off. It's just sampling... quoting, sort of. This seems like less of a problem to me.

If you're an ambient musician creating drone work, and you take a large section of another ambient artist's drone and make it the basis for your own track, that's entirely different. To me that's just laziness, a terrible, lame shortcut... and much more like stealing or at least dishonesty, even if you credit it. You're using the person's work for something very much like the original work, barely changing it, certainly not repurposing it or creating something very new/different from it.

And yes, loop libraries or commercial sample packs are totally different. Those are sold with the express purpose of being used in other people's work.

I agree totally with your opinion, I like it..cause you do not seem to generalize too much and have "strict" opinion about it.  It is all about a case to case basis..

Regarding ambient...I agree there.. what is the point if you steal the whole core from some one else, but i am sure plenty do it, it is lazyness indeed.  But there people doing drone in a lot of ways,  there is many drone artists that just  slow down the sound and pitch it a lot maybe add your own effect chain and reverb,  I think in that kind of drone does it really matter what the source is if it sounds like completely different..
Atleast the music has now become a totally different form, even though the source was not own made, it is still a new artwork..   I guess in the ambient scene there is a lot of people who do ambient in such ways..
Personally I would never do a drone in that way since I am all about it real time/live expression, but I have full respect for that people do music differently and should be free to express themselves how they want.

[drone on]

With all the billions of choices modern synths offer, can't understand why an em/ambient artist would need to sampleand then change someone else's work.  Laziness, yes.  Stealing, yes.

[Ekstasis]

With all the billions of choices modern synths offer, can't understand why an em/ambient artist would need to sampleand then change someone else's work.  Laziness, yes.  Stealing, yes.

I vote for artistic freedom!

[APK]

Immersion: your "artistic freedom" reminds me of your "set the music free", which is pretty much the same as 'I will download illegally anything that is digital and do what I want with it even though I didn't create it and it is not mine to use.'

Artistic freedom means building on the shoulders of great artists and being inspired by their work and going your own way with what you have discovered with your own skills and your own medium.

Artistic freedom does not mean, to shift the example just a tiny bit, running into a music store and stealing whatever equipment might serve your own ends while shouting "artistic freedom!" It is simply stealing from the store, just as it is stealing from the artist if you just use whatever you want of his or her works without first getting permission or paying for what you are using.

I'm done with people who always want other people's labour for free ... no matter what cliche battle cry they might use.

It's nothing very difficult to understand. It is just being honest with, and respectful to, other artists who created stuff before you.

[Ekstasis]

Immersion: your "artistic freedom" reminds me of your "set the music free", which is pretty much the same as 'I will download illegally anything that is digital and do what I want with it even though I didn't create it and it is not mine to use.'

Artistic freedom means building on the shoulders of great artists and being inspired by their work and going your own way with what you have discovered with your own skills and your own medium.

Artistic freedom does not mean, to shift the example just a tiny bit, running into a music store and stealing whatever equipment might serve your own ends while shouting "artistic freedom!" It is simply stealing from the store, just as it is stealing from the artist if you just use whatever you want of his or her works without first getting permission or paying for what you are using.

I'm done with people who always want other people's labour for free ... no matter what cliche battle cry they might use.

It's nothing very difficult to understand. It is just being honest with, and respectful to, other artists who created stuff before you.

Of course It is a waste of time to try to convince a label owner about these things since you want to protect your own interests.

Again you generalize too much you want a patent for every sound in the world like the lawyers ?
There is too much tunnel vision here.   You make extreme propaganda examples just to prove your point .

The copyright serves a purpose but it should be on case to case basis.. it would be better if it was a musician that would do the judge and not a lawyer who are just in it to collect more money.
You must have a balanced perspective, also, is the gain better then a system where all sound is patented which limit your artistic freedom. Also melodies are also copyrighted so even if you as an artist never have heard the original before and come up with the same melody you are not allowed to the according the law book

You make extreme propaganda examples, I am sure it exist mythomaniac people which have it as a disease  to just download some music and then say that they made it.  Of course I do not stand by such thing.. but if you use it in an artistic and creative way I see no limitations.  Usually people will notice such things, problem here seem to be that we talk from an "ambient" perspective and not normal music with melody.

Also since when did making music become a "labour" , so you mean you make music only to gain money ?
You should do it just for your own pleasure if it is a labour for you maybe you are in it for the wrong reasons, even though I would not blame people who only do it to earn money but  I think on a personal level that it should not be that driving force.