On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Anika Agebjoern wrote:
quoted 8 lines me as very reasonable, but a bit different than the laws that are used for> >me as very reasonable, but a bit different than the laws that are used for
> >music these days (unfortunately)
> >
> >perhaps im a bit off base here- any one care to correct/flame me...
>
> You are right! Take sampling, where you use old sounds, or photography,
> where you basically copy the reality. I would say both these forms of art
> have creative input so why wouldn't mixtapes?
Heck, AFX sampled plenty of beats/breaks/sounds, wouldn't he be satisfied
with the high level of sales he already has had? That is, wouldn't he be
a bit hypocritical in squandering his time over these few trainspotters'
bootlegging, etc? How much money is potentially lost there anyway vs.
what he/REPHLEX-label might make hourly from his creative work?
All I know is; I am selling tapes of my non-sampled, synth programmed
stuff next to local DJ tapes, and while their mediocre mixes are priced
at $12-15 a tape, my original songs are selling for less! This feels
very wrong to me. Sure there is an art to mixing, but, $15?!?!? A CD of
local ambient-techno programmers sells for less than that and goes to the
people who actually generated the sounds!!
David Chandler - chandler@nethost.multnomah.lib.or.us (503)301-3011
grep -i casio goodwillbins >> mystudio ;
grep -i atari goodwillbins >> mystudio ;