The Recording Industry Association Of America was in a tailspin while our bandwidth grew to the point where we could stockpile entire discographies in the blink of an eye. Naturally, a few creatives saw the potential there for a brand-new instrument.
That declaration seems ridiculous today, when all music is free and delineated on a thousand different streaming services—when the biggest stars in the world are year-old mutineers who amass millions of SoundCloud plays without a label or a PR liaison.
But surely this music sounded better, and more radical, when it was colored by a national debate over copyright law, long before the music industry buckled and conceded? It stole from different music. It turned music on its head and made it feel completely different, and this shit was illegal. After all, the war is won. A musical instrument is not music. You do no credit to your position with such absurd departures from reason.
Again I ask, if these "mashup" artists are actually talented, why can they not create their own songs instead of piggybacking on existing material? Surely if what they are doing is so special, they would be able to do it and find success without relying on directly lifting from the work of other artists. I repeat my contention that the real problem here is the blog author's failure to appreciate what actually goes into the creation of original music, and an aesthetic poverty that renders him unable to appreciate the difference between reworks of original material vs the creation of actual original material.
Here's a simple test- if you take away everything from a "mashup" that's lifted directly from someone else's work, are you left with something of creative value? And no, sampling, copying, and "maships" are not equivalent to the interplay between serious composers, nor are they equivalent to stylistic borrowing between modern pop groups.
You can't hold that opinion and simultaneously hold an appreciation for what actually goes into creating original works of music- to express such an opinion is to express your ignorance of the creative act of composing and songwriting.
That's why you find yourself on the wrong side of copyright law- not because of some gross injustice of design, but because of your ignorance of the creative process and your general aesthetic poverty.
Bartok samples from Shostakovich and it's called "interplay between serious composers" but someone does the same thing on a computer and it's the end of creativity as we know it. The creativity is in the mashup. Yes, the linked video is made of individual pieces the video maker didn't create, but the final song never existed without the video maker putting it all together. It just reinforces my believe that you have narrow tastes in music and little appreciation for anything that challenges your preconceptions.
Get off your high horse and realize that there's more to creativity in this world than what you happen to like or accept. All you're arguing is that the only way to create music is the way it's always been done or more specifically the way it's always been done professionally.
There's so much more to art than that. PaulT profile , 19 Mar am. Are you sure that's a road you want to go down? The rest is "stop liking what I don't like! It just reinforces my belief that you have terrible taste in music and little appreciation for actual creativity. That One Guy profile , 18 Mar am. Well, it's a good thing we've got the Lord and High Master of Musical Taste here to tell us what good music is, and therefor what should and should not count. And here I was thinking that musical tastes were subjective, and differed from person to person, clearly I was wrong, and your taste in music is all that matters.
Here's the exact same type of creative sampling, except he's using a video of his environment rather than videos he finds on the internet. But I suppose you don't consider either one an actual creative act. Unfortunately, your opinion is not fact, no matter how much you believe it or what you cherry pick to "prove" it.
Mike Masnick profile , 19 Mar am. It's pure crap Your subjective taste in music is meaningless. Lots of people seem to like it quite a bit. Because an awful lot of people disagree with you, yet both of those rely heavily on sampling others works.
LAB profile , 21 Mar am. There is no doubt that Kutiman is incredibly creative and the work would definitively lean more towards fair use as very small parts of the original sources were used to create a new work. However, there are many mashups or remixes that use the entire vocal track of one song over the instrumental of another.
In this context I can understand and support the licensing aspect. The court has defined a sample as requiring licensing in that it is the exact performance that is used. It is not similar, it is a copy. In addition, an argument although weak could be made that the mashup or remix is depriving the original creator to commercially exploit the work in the same manner. I'm not who you think I am, and I have no idea what you're talking about.
Please Mint a toad, find me on twitter peerthrough to stay up to date. Or sign up for the Peer through newsletter. Mark loves making videos, thinking, tinkering with futuristic tech, running experiments and music.
Peer Through Media allows him to do all of those things. You can learn more about him and his projects here: Mark Sandusky.
View all posts. What is decentralized finance? Decentralized Finance, or DeFi, is an umbrella term for multiple financial applications in blockchain aimed at disrupting financial services. DeFi products are based on public decentralized blockchain networks; the most popular of This guide will teach you exactly how to go from "normal" fiat money to buying your first NFT, No Fun Toad , on the Ethereum blockchain.
Axie Infinity is a game created by Sky Mavis that lets players earn real-life money through gameplay. It is currently the most popular entry in the emerging Play-to-earn P2E gaming model. Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment. Submit Comment. Here is essentially this post as a more free flowing video version:. Table of Contents. Mark Sandusky. DJS: I post my mashups on my website. Most of them are linked to the Mashup Industries site from there.
Sometimes I upload the tracks on my Official site. And, for the videos yes, I make those, too! TCW: Some people think of mashup artists as criminals, snatching pieces of copyrighted works and making products from them. I think that depends on whether you charge for them or not….
But there are many issues to consider. What a your thoughts on mashups as an art form? Do you give yours away for free? Or do you charge? Are your creations licensed or do you just borrow pieces to create your tracks? That makes me actually a pirate , mashups are often considered illegal. The good thing is that mashups are accepted by most of the record companies, especially the smaller ones appreciate them as it is some additional free promotion for their artists.
I always list the tracks used so everybody is able to check out the original versions. So is it art then? TCW: Have you ever been contacted by a label or artist and asked to remove a mashup from the web, or threatened with legal action because of your work as a mashup artist?
How did you develop your skills? I was thinking about doing workshops though; people keep asking me about the art to mash. So learning-by-doing was my key, I guess. Nowadays you can read or watch many production tutorials that are spread around the web, so for beginners this might be an interesting approach to developing production skills faster.
TCW: Well, if you do decide to run some workshops, talk to me. My skills were developed old-school, back in the day the disco era when continuous mixing using two turntables was the norm. But for those aspiring mashup artists getting started today, what advice do you have?
Where can they gain skills? And what skills are critical?
0コメント