Where do we draw the line with sampling?

I honestly appreciate beats that use a sample as one several components to a beat rather than the foundation of the beat. I kind of find it really lazy when a beat is basically a sample but with the pitch changed plus a few drums added. That's just taking a good song and singing over it instead of going through the whole or even half of the creative process yourself.

Kanye is the best example of using samples appropriately. I know my standards could be a bit harsh if not overkill since the music scene has always endorsed and supported covers of songs and remixes, this just might be the production version of a music cover. I'm still conflicted with it because it really makes the creative process hollow. I'm no stranger to dadism and the concept of readymades. This isn't a ready made though but rather someone else's art which you fashion as your own

Don't get me wrong. The culture of covering songs, remixes and sampling has given us different takes to songs and artists. What it has also done is create a phenomenon of original songs being eclipsed by the cover/remix, like nina simone's the other women, Lana's has been so successful people think it's the original. Is this Imitative competition or borderline appropiation? That's my question. I just want to know when exactly has virgil abloh's 3% been met and when it hasn't, and if we should endorse anything below it

Entire fantastic albums have been made out of sampling (Girl Talk, DJ Shadow, etc). The only line I would draw is a totally overused song for a sample, such as “The Message,” which just sounds lazy and unoriginal.

PWEI had a whole set of mottos, one of which was rules to sampling:

SAMPLE IT

LOOP IT

FUCK IT

EAT IT

a lot of newer folks completely miss step three, fucking it up. You don’t always have to fuck it up beyond recognition, but if you don’t fuck it then you haven’t really contributed, have you? It’s not yours unless you fuck it.

I used to think samples were lazy but then i decided to try it out for myself and there are definitely lazy ways of sampling like when people just loop a sample but there's something really satisfying about chopping and flipping a sample into something cool. I like the idea of working within the parameters of something that already exists.

Your last paragraph is completely lost on me though lol

Like, the whole paragraph?

and if it goes without consequence we let people get away with ripping off

That horrible "Anxiety" song is a pretty clear case of how not to sample. It's just a karaoke track of the Gotye song with some inane new vocals over it. It's not doing anything interesting with the sample or recontextualizing it. She just takes one song and uses it instead of writing a new one. Lazy and terrible.

Technologic

From a creative perspective, I don’t think there should be any line drawn. The legal perspective is another matter.

Honestly i dont think theres an minimum amount of effort or chopping that makes a sample good in my eyes. I think its purely a taste thing

Ive heard songs with the most intricate chopped up samples.. but at the end of the day. It still sounds shit. Ive also heard songs that hugely rely on a sample and they are some of the best songs ive ever heard.

Its purely based on the producer having a good ear and vision for what sounds good.

Totally agree with this

Hard to know where to draw the line. I do get annoyed by the laziness in pop songwriting, the apparent inability to write a new melody. Like that one on the radio that just starts singing staying alive by The Bee Gees. How about writing your own chorus?

I think, when listening to a song. My first thought is 'id rather listen to the original sample'.