Quote:
Originally Posted by William_the_Bloody
As much as I love electronic music, there are great limitations on one's artistic creativity if they have to rely on sampling someone else's music, as opposed to creating their own.
If I play a brass or string instrument (Saxophone, guitar ect) I can go anywhere I want on the musical scale. I can make any arrangement of chords I want, to convey the feeling I'm going after.
If I'm relying on my sampler or the arpeggio in my synthesizer than I'm really limited on what I can do. I can sample a beat from another artist and loope it, but normally I can't make a chorus or a bridge. I'm creatively restricted.
If your say Portishead, and in addition to sampling you can compose your own songs and play instruments than you get the best of both worlds, but if your just your standard trance or house dj, chances are that the majority of your work is going to sound pretty boring & monotonous
|
Well there is already so so so much music out there that you could take samples and create pretty much anything. In fact, doing something like that through samples could be more difficult than composing something and playing it yourself because you have to do a lot of research or have a lot of knowledge to find those sounds that you want. Talking against samples or electronics as if they're not capable of doing anything apart from what you've heard in top 40 stuff, it's kind of like saying that you don't like the guitar because you don't like what George Harrison played. I don't think that those limitations really exist, because the end result is all that matters and I know examples from both electric and acoustic acts that have good and bad outcomes.
Tl;dr it's not the instrument, it's the artist.