One Love Event Extended!
skip
Home » Forums » Help » Simple question

Simple question

Sundanse Kidd
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 8:59 AM
I am a hip hop producer who samples from records. My question is, will my beats which contain uncleared samples be eligible for this site or contests running on this site….specifically the ODB contest?
fourstones
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 9:01 AM
Nope. Sorry.
Sundanse Kidd
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 10:14 AM
This is ridiculous!! Who had the brilliant idea to have a HIP HOP remix contest on a site that won’t allow sampled beats?? Not to mention the fact that, the artist(ODB) is from a group who mainly use samples for their tunes. I am thoroughly dissappointed. This contest is a disrespect to the man’s memory. Shame on RZA……
admin
admin
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 10:24 AM
The current criminalization of sample artistry is rediculous.

That’s why by putting more work into the Commons is so important.

Having a hip hop remix contest that sheds light on this issue and at the same time puts all the more music into the Commons may not be brilliant but it’s one way to change the way things work.

Some folks might thank RZA and everybody responsible for putting this work into the Commons so that the rest of us can legally sample it. Some folks.

Peace,
Victor
Sundanse Kidd
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 1:34 PM
Thanks for the response. That is a valid point. however i am concerned about a few things. First of all, does this site offer any benefit to an artist that wants to sell his/her work commercially? Secondly, from a hiphop perspective, wouldn’t everybody accessing the same sampling material hinder creativity and originality?
teru
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 2:56 PM
Hey if you’ve got a sec. check out my site. Plug.

http://cyberbusker.net/

Two really lame answers to your questions. But you have to start somewhere right? : )
admin
admin
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 4:34 PM
Quote: T First of all, does this site offer any benefit to an artist that wants to sell his/her work commercially?

It might help me to answer this question if you can explain how that is related to this contest and what kind of samples are accepted.

Quote: from a hiphop perspective, wouldn’t everybody accessing the same sampling material hinder creativity and originality?

I think we’ve all heard two DJ’s use the same sample where one used it brilliantly and the other, er, didn’t. If you draw your creativity from which samples you use and not how you use them (which is perfectly legit) then obviously, limiting the pool is a hindrance. But again, that’s another argument for widing the pool of legal samples which is what Creative Commons is all about.

Peace,
Victor
[edit]
Sundanse Kidd
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 15, 2005 @ 8:40 PM
Sorry, the question "does this site offer any benefit to an artist that wants to sell his/her work commercially?", was more of a general question concerning this site not the contest.
ASHWAN
.
permalink   Sat, Apr 16, 2005 @ 6:32 AM
MR SUDAN, DON’T FORGET RULES ARE MADE TO BE BROKEN (don’t get caught)….AFTERALL YOU ARE HIP HOP….NO?
ALSO, working within limitations doesn’t necesarilly give limited results. look at what you can do just by editing samples. sometimes limitations bring out creative responses you wouldn’t normally get. dangermouses GREY ALBUM for example.
hip hop itself is about working with limitations. crackin open a lamp post to hotwire the turntables to jam in the park. using the left and right channels of a sony tape deck as a mixer for your decks, shit, beatboxin to create a beat to rhyme to….that type of mentality.
public enemy and the beatles and all those other great bands didn’t have in their studios half of what we have at home in terms of technology.
just get on with yo shit and prove to us how creative you are.
I used to spin on my back in shoppin centres so i could get a buck or so together to go buy aftershave to get the girls (didn’t work), i was out painting walls in the nights, i bought my first set of decks over 15 years ago and and i still deejay out occasionally. now i sit at home and produce beats, coz i love bangin hip hop. I’m a scouser, but I am hip hop. if you gonna claim the culture you gotta be the culture. go do it.
peace,
ashwan
ASHWAN
.
permalink   Sat, Apr 16, 2005 @ 6:34 AM
sundanse…gomem nasai! i think i need glasses (MAYBE THAT EXPLAINS THE CAPSLOCKS).
ashwan…..thc
admin
admin
.
permalink   Sat, Apr 16, 2005 @ 8:56 AM
Quote: Sorry, the question "does this site offer any benefit to an artist that wants to sell his/her work commercially?", was more of a general question concerning this site not the contest.

(No problem I just couldn’t see the connection)

As of now, we’re not really that kind of site, not directly anyway, but we’re willing to learn how to serve the community.

I can tell you that *indirectly* we seem to be on track for making some kind of impact. We are only 4 months old and in that time our top artists have passed 10,000 unique downloads and indie label A&R folks have been in touch with us so I know they are trolling the site.

The best material here has been played on very popular (Creative Commons only) podcasts that I know reaches many more 1000s of listeners.

It may also be worth mentioning that our next contest’s prize is a recording contract with (for profit) Magnatune. a successful indie Creative Commons label (disclosure: I’m signed with them).

Peace,
VS
Sundanse Kidd
.
permalink   Mon, Apr 18, 2005 @ 12:51 PM
thanks for clearing everything up for me. Although I don’t agree with having the ol dirty contest on this site, I do think the site is a positive step forward for sampling.

PEACE OUT
Sundanse Kidd
fourstones
.
permalink   Tue, Apr 19, 2005 @ 7:07 PM
(wait, are we back to talking about the contest again? ;))

hey, I hear ya, believe me I understand the part of hip-hop (and turntablism) sampling where the listener actually *recognizes* the sample and the artistry is putting in a new context.

However, any site that holds a contest like this in the way you’re talking about is violation of US Federal law (!) — not just open to lawsuits by the rights holders, but actual criminal prosecution (and the supreme court heard arguments last month and is deciding right now if guys like me, who wrote this site can be held liable for your booty uploads. I’m sorry, that’s more than ph*cked up.)

So what are you going to do about it?

I think there are only three ways of dealing with this situation:

1) Ignore all the law stuff and just have a booty contest (which is what you seem to be suggesting)
2) Have the contest specifically in violation of the law as an act of civil disobedience.
3) Grow the pool of legal samples and prove there is an "alternative" universe to be had.

(1) is fun but pointless (like getting drunk — yea I do it sometimes but it’s not a way to live) Nobody actually benefits from this.

(2) is very important and is lead by groups like http://downhillbattle.org that staged http://greytuesday.org (hey fourstones!) and http://www.bannedmusic.org. This stuff sends a clear and loud signal and raises all kinds of good awareness.

(3) is what Creative Commons does. It says: keep your laws, prosecute someone else, we don’t actually need you at all. So CC gets the Beasties, Chuck D, DOB (through RZA), Zap Mama, et. al. to start the revolution so that the generation after you has a legal pool to sample from, free of lawyers, politicians, judges. Just artists.

So if you’re suggesting a pointless booty contest that doesn’t help the folks you’re sampling and doesn’t help the folks that want to sample and file-share your remix, then yea, this prolly tain’t d place 4u.

If you want to take on the bastards head on then hell ya (BUT NOT AT THIS SITE), it’s been a year since my last C&D http://fourstones.net/danger so maybe it’s about time for another.

Meanwhile the RIAA has a 100 year head start so I got to get movin.

Peace,
Victor

(btw, I should probably mention that these are 100% my views, many of which are likely not shared by my sponsors.)
ASHWAN
.
permalink   Wed, Apr 20, 2005 @ 12:04 PM
ok, to simplify and clarify on what victor is saying (purely for my own sake), if you want to play a different game to the one that is on offer here, then go over there and organise it.
we are being given the chance of remixing stuff by ODB(rip) and potentially being released. what greater homage to an individual can you give. i would say ban any mother f8cker who didn’t buy "i like it raw" when it first came out on vinyl, but they would be my rules.
ash

ASHWAN
.
permalink   Wed, Apr 20, 2005 @ 12:07 PM
you know, i just re read that and thought to myself, most motherf8ckers who read that will have no idea what i’m on about….
me neither, but people have suffered for this culture a WHOLE lot more than i have.
ash
Sundanse Kidd
.
permalink   Thu, Apr 21, 2005 @ 9:06 PM
first of all, my upload would not be "booty".
secondly, there are 5 options:
4)let people post links to their songs in the forum and offer uploading services to only your members that follow your sites regulations . Unless that is somehow illegal too.
5)Here’s a radical idea….LET’S NOT HAVE THE CONTEST ON THE INTERNET, PERIOD. A very valid, completely legal option.
…and b4 i go …..let me mention that most UNDERGROUND(where wu came from), sample based, hiphop producers do NOT clear their samples. Due to the fact nobody cares until large amounts of money are made and even if they do decide to take legal action, there is no such thing as bad publicity, ask Dangermouse.
take it ez
fourstones
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 22, 2005 @ 5:58 AM
Quote: first of all, my upload would not be "booty".
I just meant illegal. That’s all.

Quote: 4)let people post links to their songs in the forum and offer uploading services to only your members that follow your sites regulations . Unless that is somehow illegal too.
Well, nothing with illegal samples could win so that’s kind of pointless

Quote: 5)Here’s a radical idea….LET’S NOT HAVE THE CONTEST ON THE INTERNET, PERIOD. A very valid, completely legal option..
Heh, well it’s not the biggest cause in the world but an artist should have the right to express themselves in a public forum and those rights should not be controlled by a few corporations making decisions about what gets to be heard in public and what doesn’t. Some of us think that kind of stuff is important for, you know, culture and sh1t.

Quote: ask Dangermouse.
Yea, let’s ask him, he starts out bootlegging samples (1), then takes part of in a civil disobedience (2) then licenses his music under Creative Commons (3).

http://ccmixter.org/file/Wi...

(Ah, sweet irony, it’s been sooooo long. Where ya been?)

Peace,
Victor
Sucker MC
.
permalink   Mon, Apr 25, 2005 @ 11:32 AM
wow! lemme get a peice. think about this for a sec…
You are an actual musician that has trained all your life you create a NEW peice of music. And/or you have a god given talent to write music. You record your new creation or have someone else record it. Then a different person "samples" your creation and puts a new drum beat on it and raps over that. THEN, with your creation, they (and their record company) make millions of dollars from the song you wrote, and you don’t get one cent for it.

HOW WOULD YOU FEEL!!?? I don’t know about you, but if someone is making money off of what I RIGHTFULLY OWN, I’m calling my lawer. (Or coming to their crib with my boyz…to get my mine). You write or record something there is actual ownership. People don’t get it because it isn’t ownership of something physical. Picture it as your car, if someone stole it, what would you do?? You would go get it back, or call the cops right?!?

Sampling is dope and I bet I have doing it since with were in diapers, but you need to give respect and $$ to those who you are sampling from (stealing from/inspired by). Trust me, I have over 2,000 records, I know a ‘lil bit about sampling…..

These samples are from artist just like you and me. Don’t you think they deserve love and repsect (AKA $$$ for the shit they own)??

I also think that the actual players Like Bernard Purdy (AKA the Funky Drummer) should be paid and recognized too. (by the way some asshole actually put the funky drummer break on this site with a few dumb-ass kicks over it and actully called it theirs! and free to sample!- that’s weak and illegal- u better *censored*in’ wreko-nize, for real)

OR you could take (i mean sample) from those who create it, in order to be sampled (like this site).

Lemme tell you something dog, just cuz you can program a beat (or even worse loop a beat U got from some program) over someone else unique creation, doesn’t qualify you as a "producer."

NOW LISTEN UP, I haven’t heard your stuff and I don’t know you, so PLEASE don’t take it personally. You could be the dopest porducer since Dr. Dre, but I am talking to all these new kids who get some loops from the web or a "Remix" program and have no clue where the loops came from, if it’s legal, don’t know anything about copyright law, and have no real appreciation of the real deal. If that’s you, then I mean you (any reader).

This Hip Hop shit started with DJs going between breaks on record that they loved and they knew the artist that they were referencing, who played it, when it was recorded etc. and they showed LOVE. They had knowledge and love for the music. It wasn’t some prefabricated *censored*ing bullshit that someone else spoon feed them.

OK I’m gonna get off my soap box now, SORRY… as you can tell I have some feelings on this…don’t get you panties in a wad…

Yo, about the remix comtest; CC is not the only party here. You gotta think about Dash Music and the HUGE corporation that is behind them. They don’t want to get sued. So read a *censored*ing music law book or something, an’ educate your- damn-self on what’s up before you piss on some shit you know nothing about. OR ….
"..if you don’t know, act like you know…"
fourstones
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 29, 2005 @ 8:54 AM
One thing to think about is that "remixing" is actually many art forms. Some of those art forms require the evocative usage of sounds the listener is supposed to recognize. Part of the reason so much of hip-hop is ‘underground’ is because the art-form requires sample recognition and doing that (in the vast majority of cases) is a federal crime.

The Constitution of the US specifically tries to strike a BALANCE between the artist’s/inventor’s rights and the larger cultural good. Things seem pretty out of balance to me when an art form that requires the use of a few seconds of a 40+ year old performance is criminalized.

In Purdie’s case, he never owned the rights to either the performance or composition but I guess he could claim rights to some invention. HOWEVER he’d be nowhere without Chick Webb and everybody else he "borrowed" licks from that came before him. If he had to pay for every lick he ever stole, chop for chop, we’d have never heard of him. (Not to mention a big reason we all sample him is because of the *sound* of those records which he had very little to do with.)

All art builds on previous work. Before the digital age that meant stealing licks, chord progressions and snippets of melodies which we have all come to recognize as part of the artistic process. Somewhere, someone needs to step up and rethink what that means now that you are reading this on a computer more powerful than the ones in the Gemini space missions while Purdie was recording those breaks we all use.

‘All right reserved’ by everybody involved for all time is not a workable answer.
ASHWAN
.
permalink   Fri, Apr 29, 2005 @ 11:47 AM
simple question…their is no simple answer…ya’ll have had many good ones from victor, but stuff out there becomes like a colour, use it or not. look at the tune TALKIN ALL THAT JAZZ (by stetsasonic)which came about when the guy from MTUME (who i love) was cussin sample based music..life aint in black and white no mo…dowhutchalike.
Sucker MC
.
permalink   Mon, May 2, 2005 @ 2:06 PM
Yo Vic,
You make some great points about being inspired by other artist. This is a good thought provoking discussion that directly effects digital musicians/remixer/producers/wack ass posers and everyone who makes and loves music which contain recorded elements of previous works.
I think the one distinction that should be made in your example of being inspired by those who came B4 U is: in your example you are talking about musicians he had skills and worked to hone those skills. AND most importantly they respected those they stole from. They also needed to be talented enough to succeed (get away with) stealing and incorporating those styles into their own.
I think that we have a different situation today, where you can actually take full performances from other people’s works-blend them together- have something new and make a lot of money doing so. Which in some cases requires no skill other than knowing how to use google and LIVE The other thing, with the technology today the application does ALL the work, like time stretching finding the right samples that you could make fit. Now you just click a button and the application does it on its own, which is dope don’t get me wrong, but it takes no skill or creative ear.
I sound kinda old but, when I started sampling we were really creating a whole new genre. Sound itself hadn’t been used to make music before (late 80’s early 90’s) and we were making something new. Now the programs come with samples preloaded and kids have no idea where they came from if it is off a record or made for the program.
I think it’s just a matter of respect. When a jazz musician played solo that included an interpretation from another artist, people would know and they would do it out of respect as a way to honor the people they liked. I think that there is a big difference between taking something from someone a doing it yourself in a new way; Vs. taking from someone and not being able to do what they did in the first place and not changing it with your interpretation. Then to not credit that person, even to say that they are dope and they are the ones who did it, that’s ever worse.
I think that you have to know the law as it is now to understand why and where it should be changed. And the only way to do that is to bring law suites or try to push through new legislation (we don’t have the $$ for that though).
Ok sorry this is so long. One last thing…

The Eminem/Dr. Dre song “My Name Is,? you probably know the story. That whole groove for the entire song was taken from a small bit of a French jazz artist (sorry don’t know the name). It was just a ‘lil break in his track, like most of the dope breaks are. It was actually re-played, not sampled. OK, so, Dre and Em and their label (mostly the label) made tens of millions of dollars from the song that they made. That was totally based around on this guy’s song. I am talking ALL of the music and the whole groove from “My Name Is?.

Do you think that guy is due ANY money from that????

Well, a judge and all of their lawyers (both sides) did. Dre and Em lost ALL the rights for that song, forever, AND they had to pay him millions (I don’t remember the full amount, but it was more than 3mill.). Just because they took it and didn’t ask. If they had simply cleared the sample, they would be sharing the $$, since they didn’t it’s, now ALL his. It happened to work out for them in the long run and Eminem has a career based (mostly) on that song, but most artists would be severely impacted by that kind of settlement.

I also think if you (anyone) were to look at the question from the stand point of the French Jazz dude, you would see why he want after what was his. Yo, they made a sh*t pile of $$ off his track and had no plans of compensating him in any way. I woulda done the same thing, even though those two HipHop artist have inspired me to great lengths and will continue to my whole life. I got love for Dre, been a fan since ’85. But stealing just comes down to what’s fair.
admin
admin
.
permalink   Mon, May 2, 2005 @ 2:57 PM
(If you mean Jacques Loussier the track is "Kill You" and he sued for $10M and half royaltees of the album plus a bunch other heavy handed lawyerly restraining demands. I had not heard of any settlement or judgement. Besides, not sure if this is on point or not but I’m pretty sure Em is huge because he is hugely talented, not because he stole music.)

The situation may be new but the argument is very, very old.

There are countless brilliant jazz and blues musicians from 100 years ago that we will never hear. And I mean NEVER because that’s how often they were recorded.

Why? Because many ot them, especially the very best at the time refused to record themselves. They were horrified at the though that anybody with a $2 horn and one of those new-fangled soul-sucking phonograph gizmos could steal their best licks. Sound familiar? Trust me, 100 years from now when digitial recording techniques are no longer new fangled gizmos your argument will seem just as quaint (and wrong ;)).

Advancements in technology happen all the time. The artistic process has stayed the same: you steal from what came before. Live and ACID are godsends because they accellerate the artistic process — they make it easier to steal. Just like the phonograph (without which their would NEVER have been swing, leave alone be-bop or rock and roll.)

By clamping down (criminalizing) sampling, i.e. treating the theft of a Frenchman’s piano riff from 1979 the same as stealing a car, we kill the art forms that are coming in the next 100 years.

This line of "it just doesn’t take talent" is a straw man that (being much older than you) I have heard many many many many many times. When instruments (and Dylan) went electric, when The Beatles starting using synths, when synths were pre-packaged with patches, when samplers came onto the scene, when they became commidity instruments, when vinyl DJs (righfully) caleld themselves musicians, when ACID 2.0 became popular, on and on. Shitty musicians who do not express real emotion with music are NOT made better by technology and never will be.

Loussier (having sold what, 10 million records?) would do well to remember what it was like when he was stealing riffs, using the very latest technology he had at hand. A 35 year old piano riff that you’ve made millions on might well be a candidate for consideration for putting into the commercial Commons for the sake of future musicians to ply the same art (with different tools) that he did.

Respect travels both ways.

So no, I would not automatically sue the shit out of a kid stealing licks from me.

[edit]
tacet
.
permalink   Fri, Dec 2, 2005 @ 1:44 PM
Sorry for diggin this thread back up, it’s late and I was just reading the posts coz I’m new here :)

I think this is a circular issue as long as one thing is involved….money. People talk of their “right” to something they created remaining “theirs” and become incenced only when somebody else creates something which is commercially successful.

The Eminem and Dre situation is a great example, they made mega $ from their track which used somebody elses track. Had the French guy heard something you or I had done which got released under a CC licence, I doubt he’d even care. BUT because Eminem and Dre used this guys work for commercial gain, he demanded his share.

I personally think he was right to do so. When he released his work he didn’t do so on the understanding that it would be copied verbatim for commercial gain, infact (c) was supposed to protect him from that eventuality. Interestingly part of the Creative Commons licence even covers this directly, afterall how pissed off would you be if Dre came and lifted your track from here and made a top ten hit from all your hard work without giving you a penny?

However, if Dre remixed it, respected the licence and re-introduced it into the CC library, wthout commercial gain, then great! …but I don’t see any of his samples on here, I don’t see him taking part in this community and if you post his samples on here you’re ass would be theirs. So there’s a hipocricy to what these hip-hop stars do, because they themselves are often the loudest protesters when their stuff gets sampled.

We all create “stuff” for different reasons, for love, for fun, for the kudos or for the dollars, pounds, sheckles….for food, wine, baseball cards whatever!

Our reasons sometimes take us down certain roads, shortcuts and back lanes or distant and expansive routes through lands of milk and honey, metaphorically speaking.

As with all kinds of art, you get back what you put in.
fourstones
.
permalink   Fri, Dec 2, 2005 @ 3:06 PM
Quote: how pissed off would you be if Dre came and lifted your track from here and made a top ten hit from all your hard work without giving you a penny?

"i put my music online because i want people to hear it. i’d obviously love to make a living making music, but if the worst-case scenario is becoming a well-heard artist that never gets paid, i can live with that."

Brad Sucks

"…the majority of songwriters i’ve talked with are still more concerned about “having my song ripped off” or “people stealing my music” than anything else. I keep telling people: stop worrying about piracy and start worrying about obscurity. My biggest fear is not that someone might be stealing my songs, but that no one knows I have songs worthy of their attention, let alone worth stealing.”

Scott Andrew

“Giving your music away is good for your career.”

Me.

To get some prespective: Dre, Em, and the French guy are all mega rich from music, it reminds of software developers who make $38k (or nothing because they’re still in school) taking sides in a battle between Gates and Ellison and Sun and Jobs.

I, on the other hand, would be amazingly gassed with pleasure if ANYBODY ANYWHERE (leave alone Dre) would deem my music worthy of stealing and could prove to the world that my music is worth buckets of money. I get goose bumps thinking about it.
tacet
.
permalink   Sat, Dec 3, 2005 @ 10:31 AM
Quote:
“I put my music online because I want people to hear it. I’d obviously love to make a living making music, but if the worst-case scenario is becoming a well-heard artist that never gets paid, I can live with that.”

Brad Sucks


I’m familiar with Brad’s stuff and I’ve already sent his url to friends who I think might appreciate his music. I very much like his attitude.

Quote:
“…the majority of songwriters I’ve talked with are still more concerned about “having my song ripped off” or “people stealing my music” than anything else. I keep telling people: stop worrying about piracy and start worrying about obscurity. My biggest fear is not that someone might be stealing my songs, but that no one knows I have songs worthy of their attention, let alone worth stealing.”

Scott Andrew


Right on the money, if you’d pardon the pun! I think in the longer term musicians will become more open to this kind of holistic thinking. Worry less about what they “might” have made (money wise), and leave that kind of thinking to the record industry and their legions of unemployed number counters and lawyers.


Quote:
“Giving your music away is good for your career.”

Me.


Well, who knows? We’re in unchartered waters here, it’s all part of the fun, ehy? Lets say you did succeed and “Victor” became the new Eminem in terms of presence and popularity, do you think Apple would release a Victor iPod? …you bet your ass they would!

What we’re looking for here is a seachange, almost a complete polar reverse of the current restrictive music industry.

I’m interested in the fact that the two advocates you cite are both of the genre I least expected to find here. I initially expected to find only people mashing up stuff and remixing (not that that would have been a bad thing). I really pleased to find depth, width and height! ;)

Quote:
To get some prespective: Dre, Em, and the French guy are all mega rich from music, it reminds of software developers who make $38k (or nothing because they’re still in school) taking sides in a battle between Gates and Ellison and Sun and Jobs.


There will always be superstars, with super egos. Money seems to bring out the worst in people, so maybe instead we should look to the open source software movement for inspiration (and the inventor of the internet) who’s “success” really has nothing to do with how rich they are or have become.

Linus got himself a nice job, Tim Burners Lee seems pretty content, Alan Cox, even the infamous DVD Jon :)

Lets keep thinking of music as open source information, which can be shared, worked on, distributed, mashed up, re-used, cerimoniously burnt or turned into a t-shirt.

Quote:
I, on the other hand, would be amazingly gassed with pleasure if ANYBODY ANYWHERE (leave alone Dre) would deem my music worthy of stealing and could prove to the world that my music is worth buckets of money. I get goose bumps thinking about it.


I hate to be the one to break this to you, but your stuff IS good enough! Man, I hear stuff on the radio every day which has clearly had less time spent on it than you remixes and the work of others on ccMixter.

The only difference between us and them is that they had the balls to stand on a stage, to get in peoples faces and believe in themselves so much that others started believeing too.

Many famous artist’s original cuts and demos REALLY suck BIG time, but they are progressed by their industry and their piers. They record with, and are guided by professionals not amateurs because of the high stakes involved. They eventually become a commodity, a product to fill a niche.

I would hate that, the money would be nice, but I don’t envy or aspire to be in their shoes at all.
KINGCAB
.
permalink   Fri, Dec 30, 2005 @ 6:26 AM
This is an excellent read. Very informative to me (as I know nothing much about this, I just like to make music.) and a great example of what appears to be a two-headed monster. To me, a real artist is one who creates from the depth of thier soul, and it shows in the work, regardless of the method. I have an entry in the contest, I think it expresses pretty good how I feel.