tbh sampling kick drums & hits is hardly plagurism in anyones book.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
tbh sampling kick drums & hits is hardly plagurism in anyones book.
"The Taoiseach's plans are a quick fix, not a long term solution" - DJ Sunil Sharpe
Mylo's album a few years back was almost completely made out of samples of other peoples records.
Copywrite ruled that because they had so little in common with the originals he had effectively made new music, so the samples didn't require clearance.
So I suppose its how you do it. Norman cook's remix of "brim full of asha" was basically exactly the same as the original, but with fatter crunchier drums and a few extra fills.
IT was blatantly a lot better, but I'm sure the royalties when to the original writers, not mr cook. All he did was spice up an original track.
You can do anything you want, sure. If it sounds great, so much the better.
Problem comes when you start making money from copying someone's ideas and presenting them as your own with no credit being paid to the originator.
If you make a killer hook, or riff, or drum fill and someone plonks it in their track to make it sell better then you deserve a cut of their monies.
Its more an issue when people are profiting. Which few people are. I don't think there's any problem in lifting other people's tracks so long as you're not making any coin out of doing it.
first and foremost. fcuk what anyone else frowns upon.
make good sounds come out of your speakers and enjoy yourself. the rest of it really doesn't matter.
if someone wants to take issue with the way you perform and/or put together your music, that's their look out.
if you wanna take two big fcukin loops from other people's records and drop em together to make a new track, do so.
there's alot of spastics around who will try to tell you what you can and cannot sample and what are or are not acceptable methods of creating music.
ignore them, they're basically fcuking idiots. if they don't like the way you do your shit, they don't have to listen to it.