clones 10 - ooops.. who didnt clear that sample!!!

[TheRev]

Back to the Clones track, has anyone else actually heard it? It's really not great. Not so much sampling the tracks as literally just playing them together. I was really curious when I saw the description, but totally let down when I heard it...

If this is the case I retract my comment about it being lame.

Just to be clear I was referring to him having the record pulled (if he was the culprit) Not using the sample. Shit - I own M_Nus Orange and rocked the hell out of it when it came out.

But back to the Clones record, did any of the other clones records get clearance to sample those tracks?

I dunno if it was something hot and it got pulled, it just kind of sounds weak to pull it. Unless they're somehow making boatloads of cash off the records. But is anyone doing that in this industry?

[eyeswithoutaface]

If this is the case I retract my comment about it being lame.

Just to be clear I was referring to him having the record pulled (if he was the culprit) Not using the sample. Shit - I own M_Nus Orange and rocked the hell out of it when it came out.

But back to the Clones record, did any of the other clones records get clearance to sample those tracks?

I dunno if it was something hot and it got pulled, it just kind of sounds weak to pull it. Unless they're somehow making boatloads of cash off the records. But is anyone doing that in this industry?

haha classic, make your mind up fella

i love how people just fail miserably to see things from the artists point of view in these things. This isnt just 2 shitty records that havent sold anyway being ripped, these are 2 massive tracks that are actually a source of income for someone, and i dare say if both were re-released again now they would sell bucketloads again. So there's nothing lame at all about someone like Hawtin getting a release stopped that blatently rips him in such a way. It makes perfect logical sense to me that the person who made the original music should still withold the right to decide how and when that music can are used in an instance such as this one.

I know the idea of Clones is it is a bootleg label, and i love a bootleg as much as the next guy, but that doesnt mean that the person being bootlegged shouldnt at least have the right to do something about it if they want to. Wether they actually can or not is a different matter, and obviously being at the level he is, it's not going to be hard for someone like Richie Hawtin to get his way im sure. As an example, i recently got directed to a torrent site where someone had uploaded one of my records for open download. Absolutely nothing i can do about it. The irony is, if the people who wanted the record had used the brain cells they have and emailed me i'd of sent them a vinyl copy if i have any spare, certainly mastered WAV's if not.

It's not always so black and white in this game unfortunately

fair enough if the record is actually good and you like it, but to say the original composer is lame for protecting their own interests is just crazy talk unfortunately

[TheRev]

haha classic, make your mind up fella

Not really flip flopping - I was under the impression that they had done more than just layer the two tracks.

See my thinking is that if an artist makes some signficant changes to a track and such and added something new and unique. It's a different story.

In an ideal world - yeah the original artist should likely get paid if there is a lot of $$$ involved. But I was always under the impression that lables like Clones are limited pressings.

I mean if this one shoudl be pulled, why not the rest of them?

[rhythmtech]

I mean if this one shoudl be pulled, why not the rest of them?

cause the rest are actually quite good!! :lol: