On Tue, 5 Mar 1996, Farm A Cist wrote:
quoted 22 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!!
>
yes but which ones are selling? that is the real question!
dont blame the djs, mediocre or excellent, for your own lack of sales...
and BTW, djs (when they are good) generate (or perhaps unfold) once hidden
sounds from found sounds...
-daht