Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
No, to answer the unasked question, I'm not gonna let this die without at least trying to get my point across... >But again, the "sensibilities" that are at work with a guitarist are an >intangible, organic, built-in thing Okay let me try and clarify my point: A DJ's abilities as a DJ are just as inate as a guitarist's abilities as a guitarist... you're born with a certain amount of talent that you hone through practice. And by DJ, here and throughout my posts, I've been referring to a "disc jockey" with 2 (or more) turntables as a basis and whatever else he/she might choose to have along (sampler, drum machine, etc...). I really don't see a difference between a guitarist practicing his craft and a DJ practicing his. Are we together up to this point? So, a guitarist inflecting his personality on a riff, we all agree that thats because of who he is, then why is it such a stretch to say that the way a DJ drops a sample (not necesarily from a "sample" as from a digital sampler, perhaps a cut-in from the other turntable...) into a song, as thats part of his craft, part of what he does, part of the nature of being a DJ, is really that different; he's grafting, adding elements and removing, much the same way as a guitarists picking or strumming may add or take away notes from a riff. And this really boils down to what some will see as a philosophical difference and I don't. Its almost political.... >I think for me the bottom line is that if you're >working with samples, even if you're tweaking and recontextualizing the >thing to the nth degree, you're still working with blocks of other >people's material Okay well how does your opinion of me change when i tell you all the samples i use are samples of my own performances? >I personally would feel >very uncomfortable with inserting a sample of someone else's music into my >own Thats a personal choice and one i can totally agree with, i.e. I see where you're coming from, all I'm trying to say is that there's not a lesser form of music because it simply _may_ use parts of other songs. >I just can't bear the thought of >literally buying music off the shelf. and this is where we totally agree... I own one sample CD and its a thing a freind of mine put together of like 1000 drum machine samples... >I'm not saying that each format is identical to the other in terms of what >you can do. Okay, gotcha, and i totally agree... >BTW, if you've got a better suggestion as far as terminology goes, I'd >genuinely love to hear it. I subscribe to the theory that guitar players have chosen: metal and alternative and bluegrass just becomes hopuse and techno nad jungle and gabber and all the other different genres. I guess I'd feel alot better about the "electronica" tag if there was a similar overt categorisation for "all the people that play music with guitar bass vocals and drums"... >> The whole point of electronica is accepting what others do and seeing >how >> people change whats previously been done. > >I don't know if everything I've seen in electronica supports your claim. my example i think got delted before i posted... um, the widely held concept that drum'n'bass evolved by gradually increasing the tempo of songs and slowly bringing out certain elements, over a period of several years. It was a progression... >I'm pretty sure we're taking them too seriously anyway! Yeh, you're probably right... Anyway, thanks for some stimulating conversation and some points to gnaw on when I should be working... :-) Ian///Shakespace www.intrlink.com/~illoyd