Agenda Circling Forth - soundtrack discussion
category: music [glöplog]
this is a much better place for this than prod comments at least.
Let me first point out where I stand on the soundtrack:
- if i had known before the event that it was using so much from one source, I'd have either a) not entered it, b) requested some changes to make it more "legal", or c) told the organisers "play it but then kick us out if you want". :) that is simply because i want to abide by BP's rules and not get any of them into legal trouble. i love bp, and i'd really not want to cause the guys any difficulty. if anything we did the demo thinking "it would be nice to do *something* to support the party even if it's not a winner-demo" (which by the way I never imagined it would be - I was really shocked when we actually won).
- i'd have definately put credit in the info file. yes, I should have actually contacted the musicians and found out when writing it, so sorry for that. we can fix it pretty easily, though, if it counts for anything. i totally believe in fairly crediting any source which provided a chunk of work for your piece, whether that is music, graphics or whatever.
- we're trying to get actual real permission for the samples now and clear this up in the simplest way.
So that's my point of view. We should have credited it and let the organisers decide if it was too far for the compo or not - and if so, fixed it beforehand, not entered it or been kicked out. If we couldn't have made it "compo-legal", we'd have just released it on the internet anyway (with credits of course) - this piece would have come out somehow, either in the demoscene or not. but when it comes to compos rules is rules, and you have to abide by them even if you dont like it.
When it comes to this piece with this soundtrack (if it were properly credited) I wouldn't choose to change it. Maybe you would debate this but I think the Varia piece *is* different from the original - it uses a lot of the content but it has made something new from it. Maybe not "new" in the legal sense but "new" in the artistic sense. Would the original piece work in this demo? no. but the new one does. The combination of warmth from the old samples and the cold new electronica works to make a new piece. Yes, it strays into "remix" territory - but there's a wide and blurry line here. they cut things up and reworked things a lot - it seems it's a bit more complex than maybe you first think. personally I don't treat it as a remix, I treat it as a new work using creative sampling, and I call it art. I didnt know the extent or source of the sampling but I assumed a fair amount of it was sampled - guitar and vocal etc (and so, I imagine, did most people when listening). When it's down to my personal opinion (releasing a piece with this kind of soundtrack), I'd use this kind of thing again. But when it comes to following compo rules, I'd think twice before entering it in a democompo.
Anyway, I think the scene needs to talk about this general issue of sampling/remixing/inspiration/ripping maturely. In this demo, blunderbuss, the golden path and a host of others I can remember, the issue has come up in different ways, and it needs to be resolved because it either leads to productions "unfairly" (i.e. against compo rules) doing well, or "unfairly" being hated on afterwards.
There's a mix of attitudes out there now: some people say, "credit it and it's fine"; others say "anything not made by your own hand / from your own mind is unacceptable", and there's a wealth of attitudes in between. I just wish we could come to a consensus. If there was a line drawn and we could all say, "this is fine and this is not", we could then say, "this demo is compo-legal and we'll release it at this party; this demo is not, so we'll put it out a different way". if what is acceptable to the scene gets clearly defined, we can all individually decide if we want to follow those rules and be part of the scene. that is fair.
Let me first point out where I stand on the soundtrack:
- if i had known before the event that it was using so much from one source, I'd have either a) not entered it, b) requested some changes to make it more "legal", or c) told the organisers "play it but then kick us out if you want". :) that is simply because i want to abide by BP's rules and not get any of them into legal trouble. i love bp, and i'd really not want to cause the guys any difficulty. if anything we did the demo thinking "it would be nice to do *something* to support the party even if it's not a winner-demo" (which by the way I never imagined it would be - I was really shocked when we actually won).
- i'd have definately put credit in the info file. yes, I should have actually contacted the musicians and found out when writing it, so sorry for that. we can fix it pretty easily, though, if it counts for anything. i totally believe in fairly crediting any source which provided a chunk of work for your piece, whether that is music, graphics or whatever.
- we're trying to get actual real permission for the samples now and clear this up in the simplest way.
So that's my point of view. We should have credited it and let the organisers decide if it was too far for the compo or not - and if so, fixed it beforehand, not entered it or been kicked out. If we couldn't have made it "compo-legal", we'd have just released it on the internet anyway (with credits of course) - this piece would have come out somehow, either in the demoscene or not. but when it comes to compos rules is rules, and you have to abide by them even if you dont like it.
When it comes to this piece with this soundtrack (if it were properly credited) I wouldn't choose to change it. Maybe you would debate this but I think the Varia piece *is* different from the original - it uses a lot of the content but it has made something new from it. Maybe not "new" in the legal sense but "new" in the artistic sense. Would the original piece work in this demo? no. but the new one does. The combination of warmth from the old samples and the cold new electronica works to make a new piece. Yes, it strays into "remix" territory - but there's a wide and blurry line here. they cut things up and reworked things a lot - it seems it's a bit more complex than maybe you first think. personally I don't treat it as a remix, I treat it as a new work using creative sampling, and I call it art. I didnt know the extent or source of the sampling but I assumed a fair amount of it was sampled - guitar and vocal etc (and so, I imagine, did most people when listening). When it's down to my personal opinion (releasing a piece with this kind of soundtrack), I'd use this kind of thing again. But when it comes to following compo rules, I'd think twice before entering it in a democompo.
Anyway, I think the scene needs to talk about this general issue of sampling/remixing/inspiration/ripping maturely. In this demo, blunderbuss, the golden path and a host of others I can remember, the issue has come up in different ways, and it needs to be resolved because it either leads to productions "unfairly" (i.e. against compo rules) doing well, or "unfairly" being hated on afterwards.
There's a mix of attitudes out there now: some people say, "credit it and it's fine"; others say "anything not made by your own hand / from your own mind is unacceptable", and there's a wealth of attitudes in between. I just wish we could come to a consensus. If there was a line drawn and we could all say, "this is fine and this is not", we could then say, "this demo is compo-legal and we'll release it at this party; this demo is not, so we'll put it out a different way". if what is acceptable to the scene gets clearly defined, we can all individually decide if we want to follow those rules and be part of the scene. that is fair.
Some links For easy comparison.
Original:
http://members.multimania.nl/numtek/aa/socrates_queen_of_the_universe.mp3
Remix:
http://soundcloud.com/jari-pitkanen/100117-looking-back/download
Remix (demo edit):
http://www.varia.tv/AgendaCirclingForth.mp3
Original:
http://members.multimania.nl/numtek/aa/socrates_queen_of_the_universe.mp3
Remix:
http://soundcloud.com/jari-pitkanen/100117-looking-back/download
Remix (demo edit):
http://www.varia.tv/AgendaCirclingForth.mp3
gargaj: read the previous line from the sentence you quoted?!
rp, xerxes: what devistator said.
so i guess real musicians never use derivative work? :D
and real coders dont use other peoples libs either?
i'm pro crediting when it's clear reuse. specially when it's for money. not when it's non profit.
but i don't agree with all the legal constraints currently imposed on remix culture. its a thing on its own. and it isnt all lamers missapropiating others work. i think there is value in what they do. as this track aint a pure vangelis rip.
rp, xerxes: what devistator said.
so i guess real musicians never use derivative work? :D
and real coders dont use other peoples libs either?
i'm pro crediting when it's clear reuse. specially when it's for money. not when it's non profit.
but i don't agree with all the legal constraints currently imposed on remix culture. its a thing on its own. and it isnt all lamers missapropiating others work. i think there is value in what they do. as this track aint a pure vangelis rip.
smash has a point there. I think using more than xx seconds could be a rule of thumb, but then again, if I use the riff from "smoke on the water" which is only 5 seconds long where do I stand?
but MORE IMPORTANT, the only thing I'm really upset about it 1in10's comment in the prod page. it's arrogant and senseless and we don't need that. specially from a scener.
and ps, you've missed last breakpoint _ever_ , so no candy for you.
but MORE IMPORTANT, the only thing I'm really upset about it 1in10's comment in the prod page. it's arrogant and senseless and we don't need that. specially from a scener.
and ps, you've missed last breakpoint _ever_ , so no candy for you.
... still think it's a pity that smash, who didn't know jack shit is now taking the piss for 1in10 who still shows the middle finger... that sucks.
by legal measures, it's an illegal use of the material, hence should have been disqualified. which most unlikely would cause way too much work for the orgas and everybody. and then again i also feel it's unfair for smash and destop.
let's not turn this into a discussion about remix culture. it hasn't got much in common with scene moral, ethics and rules of fair competition.
it'd be great if there would be more awareness for upright competition and legal matters.
by legal measures, it's an illegal use of the material, hence should have been disqualified. which most unlikely would cause way too much work for the orgas and everybody. and then again i also feel it's unfair for smash and destop.
let's not turn this into a discussion about remix culture. it hasn't got much in common with scene moral, ethics and rules of fair competition.
it'd be great if there would be more awareness for upright competition and legal matters.
Quote:
... still think it's a pity that smash, who didn't know jack shit is now taking the piss for 1in10 who still shows the middle finger... that sucks.
its not really like that - it's more like "the musicians didnt know the rules, and the visuals guys didnt know the source" - one side didnt ask, the other didnt tell. :) so we all share the blame for that.
"scene moral, ethics and rules of fair competition"
vs
1000's of demos with ripped samples, gfx and re-pixelled artwork.
Using pop culture to fuel the creative side has been part of the scene since the beginning.
vs
1000's of demos with ripped samples, gfx and re-pixelled artwork.
Using pop culture to fuel the creative side has been part of the scene since the beginning.
But contrary to your behaviour your musician is still busy insulting others... That's what i mean ;)
sys4096
and everytime something like this happens, where something is just too much copied and ranks high at a party it is rightfully getting bashed.
and everytime something like this happens, where something is just too much copied and ranks high at a party it is rightfully getting bashed.
even if i dont care that much about this case, I think it might
be relevant to refer to the "inf - propaganda" soundtrack...thats also a mashup/remix/whatever .
Personally I never cared about this issue, due to its complexity and the bullshit outcome. However, I respect people who try to explain themself honestly.
Whats done is done, and you can either fix it and/or be more carefull next time, which im sure smash and the gang will do/be.
be relevant to refer to the "inf - propaganda" soundtrack...thats also a mashup/remix/whatever .
Personally I never cared about this issue, due to its complexity and the bullshit outcome. However, I respect people who try to explain themself honestly.
Whats done is done, and you can either fix it and/or be more carefull next time, which im sure smash and the gang will do/be.
Quote:
But contrary to your behaviour your musician is still busy insulting others
seems to me he is just defending himself against attacks, in an unapologetic forthright manner. :)
Yeah, some of you guys get pretty personal. I have to say that I've bit my lip a little, and I know 1in10 isn't good with that.
It's the scenes way. 'What? You've done something remotely bad for this fantastic demo? BURN AT STAKE YOU UNTALENTED HACK'
also, after the timbaland case you would think sceners know how sampling works, but it seems many don't really... :/
also, after the timbaland case you would think sceners know how sampling works, but it seems many don't really... :/
aye, timbaland might request a refund from a certain fairlight member :P
Quote:
In fact, I don't give a flying fuck, as long as it sounds nice.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to YouTube.
Yeah actually, "Do It" sounded nice for many people I've met.
What look ! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqXpXmFDzF8
They definitly deserve an evil remix/rip in da faaaade
They definitly deserve an evil remix/rip in da faaaade
Quote:
i'm pro crediting when it's clear reuse. specially when it's for money. not when it's non profit.
so, as long as an artist does not make any money, it is perfectly ok to pass on anything as your own? i am speechless and a bit surprised that you have this attitude.
i am all for fan remixes, sampling to large extents etc etc.. i have even done this myself with a tori amos song where i used an acapella of hers and made music to it. obviously i think it would be wrong, misleading and directly insulting to pass that on as my own work and not credit the original author. i really really can not understand how anyone here on the demo scene can defend that?
anyhow, it is obvious from all that has been said here that this was an error in communication. forgive, forget and move on. the demo is still one of the best i have ever seen and the music is certainly part of that feeling. i hope you get legal rights to use the track as it is - although i have a hard time believing they will agree to that without properly crediting in the actual demo.
smash! you got fucked!
relax about it, I'll buy you a beer at Sundown 2010 \o/
relax about it, I'll buy you a beer at Sundown 2010 \o/
But why ripping something that *cof*soundslikeshit*cof*...
Let's be honest the rest of the demo soundtracks at BP were the same old stuff we've been hearing for years. Once the (heh) "controversy" over the soundtrack disappears I hope at least other musicians widen their scope a bit and don't stick to the same MachoDubstepGoodForSyncingTo/Guitar-basedProgMetal/MidpacedOperaWithBreakbeats we usually get, it will had so much more texture to the work, as it has here.
I second Xerxes and hotdog. Get Reed back, he copied his own tunes :P
I couldn't agree more with xerxes...
Someone make 1in10 a guitar which plays Vangelis samples instead of notes.
