|
|
DaggerHappy
from Australia on 2006-03-25 21:45 [#01867348]
Points: 662 Status: Lurker
|
|
Are the classical aspects of the music samples, or Aarons own work?
In the booklet it doesn't say anything about an orchestra or samples.
If they are samples does anyone know the originals?
Also, if a modern composer plays something from a classical era, are you allowed to sample those recordings?
|
|
nacmat
on 2006-03-25 22:30 [#01867356]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker
|
|
many of them are samples, some others are his own music
|
|
Gwely Mernans
from 23rd century entertainment (Canada) on 2006-03-25 22:41 [#01867358]
Points: 9856 Status: Lurker
|
|
you can hear the original szamar madar track in the new frankenstein movie. but don't rent it if you're curious about that, cause the movie sucks and it's a waste of money.
|
|
pigster
from melbs on 2006-03-26 03:17 [#01867390]
Points: 4480 Status: Lurker
|
|
if a modern composer plays something from a classical era, are you allowed to sample those recordings?
does anyone know the answer to this one right here?
|
|
sadist
from the dark side of the moon on 2006-03-26 03:22 [#01867393]
Points: 8670 Status: Lurker | Followup to pigster: #01867390
|
|
uuu.... sampling was discussed a lot before - try the "search" function.
i think someone said before that when an album is released in less then 1500 pieces or so, you can sample whatever you want.
i may be wrong though.
|
|
E-man
from Rixensart (Belgium) on 2006-03-26 03:49 [#01867400]
Points: 3000 Status: Regular | Followup to sadist: #01867393
|
|
lol that's just because it would probably pass unnoticed due to the limited pressing, plus it's probably a label who hasn't got money to do a lawsuit :)
it's not "legal"
|
|
pigster
from melbs on 2006-03-26 03:55 [#01867401]
Points: 4480 Status: Lurker
|
|
ah, you talking about that um... that program that renders the sound as an image and back into sound live?
|
|
Combo
from Sex on 2006-03-26 03:59 [#01867403]
Points: 7540 Status: Regular | Followup to E-man: #01867400
|
|
ahahah yeah most probably
|
|
mylittlesister
from ...wherever (United Kingdom) on 2006-03-26 04:01 [#01867404]
Points: 8472 Status: Regular | Followup to DaggerHappy: #01867348
|
|
if you're wishing to use a sample from a modern recording of (let's say) a beethoven piece, then there are no copyright issues for the actual music, however the physical recording is owned by it's creator (the producer).
|
|
mylittlesister
from ...wherever (United Kingdom) on 2006-03-26 04:01 [#01867405]
Points: 8472 Status: Regular | Followup to mylittlesister: #01867404
|
|
that was for pigster
|
|
nacmat
on 2006-03-26 04:29 [#01867413]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker
|
|
but who has the rights of mozart´s music?
|
|
pigster
from melbs on 2006-03-26 05:22 [#01867423]
Points: 4480 Status: Lurker
|
|
however the physical recording is owned by it's creator (the producer).
so wouldnt that mean you cant sample it? or you still can?...
|
|
pigster
from melbs on 2006-03-26 05:23 [#01867424]
Points: 4480 Status: Lurker | Followup to pigster: #01867423
|
|
oh wait, thatd probaly mean you're still allowed to sample it... if its real classical.
|
|
big
from lsg on 2006-03-26 06:22 [#01867438]
Points: 23730 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag
|
|
didn't aaron sample bartok (and himself playing)
|
|
Dannn_
from United Kingdom on 2006-03-26 07:00 [#01867462]
Points: 7877 Status: Lurker
|
|
in an interview he said he had learned a little bit how to play an electric violin.
and I don't imagine anyone owns mozart's music anymore but whoever produced the recording still has copyrights on it so you can't sample without permission. but im sure its easy to find someone who will let you.
|
|
mappatazee
from ¨y¨z¨| (Burkina Faso) on 2006-03-26 12:50 [#01867636]
Points: 14294 Status: Lurker
|
|
One track is mainly Bartok, I don't recognize the rest. Plus stupid beats. A lot of these songs are so bad.
|
|
Zeus
from San Francisco (United States) on 2006-03-26 15:00 [#01867682]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker | Followup to pigster: #01867424
|
|
there is a certain time limit for copyright. I don't know exactly off the top of my head, but its something like, "the life of the composer, plus 70 years" or something. so mozart is no longer under copyright, but is now in the public domain.
this means anyone can play, or record, or publish his music, without having to pay anyone. its in the public domain, which mean it belongs to everyone.
now, a modern orchestra, can perform, and record a mozart piece, without having to pay anyone. if you sample this recording, you are not breaking copyright of the composer, but you are breaking copyright of the sound recording. (there are different types of copyright... there is the copyright of the composition, and a copyrigh of the recording). so, it would be illegal to sample a modern orchestra's recording of a mozart piece.
the reason its kind of easy to get away with though, is there are hundreds and hundreds of recordings of the same mozart pieces, by different orchestras. Since its not a matter of compositional copyright (for example, you hear a song that has a sample from a beatles record, you know its breaking compositional copyright, because you know its a recent song; some of the beatles are still alive, and even considering the dead ones, it hasnt been 70 (roughly) years, since his death, so you know its copyrighted.) (btw, michael jackson bought almost all of the rights to the beatles cataloge... so when someone pays royalties for a beatles song, it goes to M Jackson). Anyways, since there are many many recordings of the same pieces by mozart, its much harder to prove who's recording copyright you are breaking. unless the recording was watermarked (a way of putting kind of an inaudible "stamp" in a recording, to prove its yours) then it would be extremely hard to prove which recording you sampled (unless it was a unique rendition of the piece, that was blatently different).
so yeah.
make sense?
|
|
Dannn_
from United Kingdom on 2006-03-26 15:35 [#01867689]
Points: 7877 Status: Lurker
|
|
i thought jackson sold most of his beatles rights
|
|
Zeus
from San Francisco (United States) on 2006-03-26 16:04 [#01867695]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker | Followup to Dannn_: #01867689
|
|
really? I hadn't heard anything about that...
to google!
|
|
Zeus
from San Francisco (United States) on 2006-03-26 16:08 [#01867696]
Points: 14042 Status: Lurker
|
|
well, it seems he did sell some... and I was wrong.. it wasn't copyright, it was publishing rights (oops!)
|
|
i_x_ten
from arsemuncher on 2006-03-26 16:44 [#01867715]
Points: 10031 Status: Regular
|
|
disney ate all the copyright pie
|
|
big
from lsg on 2006-03-26 17:00 [#01867721]
Points: 23730 Status: Lurker | Followup to mappatazee: #01867636 | Show recordbag
|
|
i understand that's track 2? i don't like that
|
|
big
from lsg on 2006-03-26 17:04 [#01867724]
Points: 23730 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag
|
|
*puts on salt
|
|
big
from lsg on 2006-03-26 17:16 [#01867731]
Points: 23730 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag
|
|
nifty, this track on shiver in eternal darkness features the star wars choir
|
|
pigster
from melbs on 2006-03-26 22:12 [#01867771]
Points: 4480 Status: Lurker
|
|
the reason its kind of easy to get away with though, is there are hundreds and hundreds of recordings of the same mozart pieces, by different orchestras.
haha. thumbs up
|
|
futureimage
from buy FIR from Juno (United Kingdom) on 2006-03-26 23:14 [#01867781]
Points: 6427 Status: Lurker | Followup to mappatazee: #01867636
|
|
I love this album! Is something wrong with me?
|
|
pigster
from melbs on 2006-03-27 01:22 [#01867789]
Points: 4480 Status: Lurker | Followup to futureimage: #01867781
|
|
nothing wrong with loving a great album. and besides, different people have different opinions...
|
|
Messageboard index
|