Another sick sample on my MPC 5000

shank carvin wrote:I think it was deleted by accident as lamp thought it was this thread and it was getting a bit*y up in here a couple posts back

ah ok that's cool.

No problem

reggiereg1 wrote:

shank carvin wrote:I think it was deleted by accident as lamp thought it was this thread and it was getting a bit*y up in here a couple posts back

ah ok that's cool.

No problem

Yeah Reg hang out for a while and you'll see how crazy it can get here, and it won't even be like your first thread where we ended up having some good convo within the disagreements.

They had to close one the other day just because another guy here got mad I told a guy to use iTunes to fix an iTunes rooted file issue. He was heated that I didn't tell him to try a combo of PT Express and Ren. Straight answer wasn't convoluted enough for his taste

Yeah Reg hang out for a while and you'll see how crazy it can get here, and it won't even be like your first thread we ended up having some good convo within the disagreements.

They had to close one the other day just because another guy here got mad I told a guy to use iTunes to fix an iTunes rooted file issue. He was heated that I didn't tell him to try a combo of PT Express and Ren. Straight answer wasn't convoluted enough for his taste [/quote]

No doubt! I think it's possible we can agree to disagree and keep it moving.

I do gotta mention it's pretty common especially in a relatively "closed" group settings like a hip hop/sampling forum to bring up previous sample usages.

One for the heads up if someone isn't sure if it's been hit already, two to enjoy the previous history of a sample's usages, and to be frank at times to point out someone is doing the same thing again whether they were aware of it or not. Then maybe that guy goes and tries a different flip.

But to me it's like Z-Trip says, it's just a gigantic puzzle and no one of us can ever get the whole puzzle, so discussing history of samples is mainly motivated by that mentality in most cases.

These aspects are only tangentially related to the more open/public instances of blowing a guys spot. For example on You Tube on a song made from samples that is released and posting "THAT IS THIS" when the guy may not have paid for clearance and you're just inviting shutdown orders on the guy by making that part of the immortal data of the web. Because YT is where they are gonna try and pop those guys, either through typed text that gives up the plot or these Shazam like automated routines.

But amongst heads who are willing to share within a smaller group of peers I think it's great fun to compare notes and study some history. I would figure you'll largely agree as your thing is to showcase a sample for people to get loose with , but you're giving the name up front. Mentioning other usages is no different.

So it's a fine line to not blow somebody's spot as far as legal issues, but still talk shop amongst ourselves, context being the key.

ay.

plus, i dont know if you got this, but i think most people on here dig / sample for themselves, and don't really need the youtube vids..........

You'd be better off starting a "OG music" thread and just posting some old shit you dig.......


my 2 cents.