Re: LOOPING PHILOSOPHY (condensed)

[illoyd@intrlink.com (Ian///Shakespace)]

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