Sampling

[Skip Intro]

Reading the bootlegging post got me thinking...

Where do you all stand on sampling??? I mean I see a lot of people on Kerri Chandler's stuff (myself included)...how many of his samples are cleared? Have Nina Simone (R.I.P.), Dom Um Romao, Pat Metheny, etc. been paid?

The filter disco crap is a dead issue, thankfully. But even the more seemlingly organic producers sample. What's your feeling? Personally I think it's F**KED. I don't care how original, subtle, or clever the sample is. People need to get paid.

[DOTSmusic]

all my shit is played or programmed by me.
the biggest issue i have with sampling is that none of the original artists ever get credit on the records.
at least tell someone you jacked a two bar loop from someone elses shit to make your track.
don't put your name down saying you wrote a track when in actuallity all you did was just rework someone elses shit.

[Bold Soul]

My opinions:

With samples of pre-recorded music, anything more than an 2 bar loop should be credited, clearned and paid for - these cases are exceptions.

If it is immediately recognizable, such as with James Brown, Issac Hayes, etc., it should be credited no matter the length.

As far as sample creators, such as some break beat loops and REX file collections, there should be no credit. Imagine buying a beats CD of riffs from a drummer like Dave Ruffy and being expected to credit him as the drummer on a track. No chance. Pre-recorded music is one thing - end user software is another.

As far as forgotten or obscure tracks, I think credit should be given out of professional courtesy, but anything less than 2 bars should be fair game. Some producers resurrect a forgotten track with a sample hook in a popular song. Should they have to pay? Na, not in my opinion.

I find sampling to be as creative as other levels of musicianship. If a musician/producer manages to beat everyone else to the market with a hot sample, other producers shouldn't be able to gain the rights to same sample.

Just some random thoughts.

[ June 16, 2003, 09:57 PM: Message edited by: Bold Soul ]

[djmarbll]

Godd thought Bold Soul.
Because of Biz Markie (taking a Mel Torme sample without giving credit) and De la Soul (taking a Turtles sample without credit), any sample (2- bars) or longer used on any record that came out after 1990 had to have sample clearance or could face a lawsuit, like MC Hammer did with Rick James over "Can't Touch This", which was so blatantly ripped from "Superfreak" that Hammer should have worn a dunce cap for that year for not consulting Rick first. Before 1990, any sample was fair game without having to get clearance. This is why if you listen to a lot of the hip-hop from the "Golden Age" (roughly 1986-1989) there's samples all over the place because there was no restriction. Nowadays, ANY recognizable loop, hook, or vocal sample must be cleared no matter how short or long it is if the producer or artist doesn't wanna face legal ramifications down the road. In some cases even the drum break must be cleared (ie. James Brown's "Funky Drummer", Barry White's "I'm Gonna Love You", Sly Stone's "Sing a Simple Song", and most recently, Incredible Bongo Band's "Apache", which was used by Nas for "Made You Look").
I feel sampling is an artform, but credit must be given when it's due. The best sampling producers are the ones who chop samples up so well that even the person who wrote the original doesn't even know it's their record being used. DJ Premier, the Beatminers, Pete Rock, Diamond D., and Large Professor are masters at this. I've learned from a friend of mine that not getting samples cleared is always more expensive than paying to get them cleared. As far as house music, many samples aren't cleared because the target audience is not as large, so the risk isn't as great. But still give credit when it's due.

[lesysteme]

"Before 1990, any sample was fair game without having to get clearance"

to this, i have only 2 words to say:

White

Lines

[Nege]

I have two more words
GOOD TIMES

Mind you those examples were replayed..........not samples......the result is the same without credit however................

[ June 17, 2003, 02:00 AM: Message edited by: Eneg ]

[djmarbll]

Exactly, interpolation (replaying the loop of a tune) isn't the same as sampling. White Lines and Good Times were replayed and were released way before 1990.

[matthew]

Originally posted by djmarbll:
Exactly, interpolation (replaying the loop of a tune) isn't the same as sampling. White Lines and Good Times were replayed and were released way before 1990. it's still stealing though.

['Magic' Juan]

Just a correction:

The person suing the Biz was Gilbert O'Sullivan for the use of "Alone Again, Naturally."

Please carry on ....

magic_juan :rolleyes:

[lesysteme]

white lines is a sample and the resulting lawsuit caused the collaspe of the 2 labels (sugarhill and 99)..so copyright has always been the issue....theyre aint no if ands or buts...its just that that copyrigt law was adjusted to include sampling thats all.

[The Donger]

Good topic Mykhal, you are saying a lot by comparing this to the bootleg thread. There are a lot of double standards in this thing we call House, and people should be aware of them.

[The Donger]

Here is my 2 cents:

Just take into consideration the fact that House doesn't usually make any $$$. If there is some $$$ made, then pay up for samples, but there usually aint. So it still can be a somewhat "illegal" art form, which can be great if you keep it underground. Think Wild Style:

"Yo why did you come here? You are gonna get us busted, you shouldn't be here. **** you! **** the interview! **** the newspaper!"

If we keep it in the train yards, then we are all good.


Another point to consider...

The $ probably isn't really there for Moodymann to pay for all the samples he uses, so it would ultimately hinder his own artistic process if he had to pay everyone for taking 1/4 notes of thier music that are sprinkled all over his albums, but couldn't afford to.

A song like "Stardust" should pay up a few $$$ cause it did end up making money and getting a major distribution deal etc., from ripping off a loop. So if there is $, definately spread it.

Give the drummer some $, cause the drummer aint had none in a long time...

[Nege]

Originally posted by lesysteme:
white lines is a sample and the resulting lawsuit caused the collaspe of the 2 labels (sugarhill and 99)..
You sure man?
white lines sounds a lot more quantized than cavern.
even the sound its a bit different.
when I say quantized I mean that whoever played it ,was more on beat than whoever played bass on cavern(I doubt if it was sequenced)but then again I wouldn't have known back in '82.
By the way,
Sugarhill got sued as well for good times.
BIG TIME!!!
Yes
It's still stealing if no credit is given

[ June 17, 2003, 09:13 AM: Message edited by: Eneg ]

[JR JAM]

Originally posted by djmarbll:
Godd thought Bold Soul.
Because of Biz Markie (taking a Mel Torme sample without giving credit) and De la Soul (taking a Turtles sample without credit), any sample (2- bars) or longer used on any record that came out after 1990 had to have sample clearance or could face a lawsuit, like MC Hammer did with Rick James over "Can't Touch This", which was so blatantly ripped from "Superfreak" that Hammer should have worn a dunce cap for that year for not consulting Rick first. Before 1990, any sample was fair game without having to get clearance. This is why if you listen to a lot of the hip-hop from the "Golden Age" (roughly 1986-1989) there's samples all over the place because there was no restriction. Nowadays, ANY recognizable loop, hook, or vocal sample must be cleared no matter how short or long it is if the producer or artist doesn't wanna face legal ramifications down the road. In some cases even the drum break must be cleared (ie. James Brown's "Funky Drummer", Barry White's "I'm Gonna Love You", Sly Stone's "Sing a Simple Song", and most recently, Incredible Bongo Band's "Apache", which was used by Nas for "Made You Look").
I feel sampling is an artform, but credit must be given when it's due. The best sampling producers are the ones who chop samples up so well that even the person who wrote the original doesn't even know it's their record being used. DJ Premier, the Beatminers, Pete Rock, Diamond D., and Large Professor are masters at this. I've learned from a friend of mine that not getting samples cleared is always more expensive than paying to get them cleared. As far as house music, many samples aren't cleared because the target audience is not as large, so the risk isn't as great. But still give credit when it's due. Who was the guys that got sue by Steely Dan(I think they won) for sampling 'Black Cow'?

[Tony Cano]

remember my post on profits on the sale of 1000 records? total profit is approx. $2,000. Nobody will come after you for that much money. It isn't worth their time and effort. Unless of course, you produce a record like startdust, get get down, bucketheads, salsoul nugget, and groove jet.

[Jamie 3:26]

JR,Sporty Theives.That cut was a joint.I have it on a label before it was picked up by Columbia.One of the guys from the group were killed in a biking accident.

['Magic' Juan]

Originally posted by JAMIE 3:26:
JR,Sporty Theives.That cut was a joint.I have it on a label before it was picked up by Columbia.One of the guys from the group were killed in a biking accident. I thought it was Lord Tariq & Peter Gunz for DeJa Vu (Uptown Baby)?

magic_juan graemlins/conf44.gif

[Jamie 3:26]

Originally posted by magic_juan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JAMIE 3:26:
JR,Sporty Theives.That cut was a joint.I have it on a label before it was picked up by Columbia.One of the guys from the group were killed in a biking accident. I thought it was Lord Tariq & Peter Gunz for DeJa Vu (Uptown Baby)?

magic_juan graemlins/conf44.gif </font>[/QUOTE]I get those cats mixed up.I know one of those cats got killed in an accident.Stop it MJ....you are on a roll today... graemlins/rofl.gif

[D J 1 3 8]

By the way, that "2 bars or more" rule has been out the window for years.

If an artist can prove his/her stuff was used and it is at all recognizable, no matter what the length, they can sue and get paid.

[Fletch]

Originally posted by magic_juan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JAMIE 3:26:
JR,Sporty Theives.That cut was a joint.I have it on a label before it was picked up by Columbia.One of the guys from the group were killed in a biking accident. I thought it was Lord Tariq & Peter Gunz for DeJa Vu (Uptown Baby)?

magic_juan graemlins/conf44.gif </font>[/QUOTE]They sample the Steely Dan cut, rap about "Uptown, Baby" (the Bronx), and then they cut the video at Shea. graemlins/jpshakehead.gif

[djmarbll]

Originally posted by JR JAM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by djmarbll:
Godd thought Bold Soul.
Because of Biz Markie (taking a Mel Torme sample without giving credit) and De la Soul (taking a Turtles sample without credit), any sample (2- bars) or longer used on any record that came out after 1990 had to have sample clearance or could face a lawsuit, like MC Hammer did with Rick James over "Can't Touch This", which was so blatantly ripped from "Superfreak" that Hammer should have worn a dunce cap for that year for not consulting Rick first. Before 1990, any sample was fair game without having to get clearance. This is why if you listen to a lot of the hip-hop from the "Golden Age" (roughly 1986-1989) there's samples all over the place because there was no restriction. Nowadays, ANY recognizable loop, hook, or vocal sample must be cleared no matter how short or long it is if the producer or artist doesn't wanna face legal ramifications down the road. In some cases even the drum break must be cleared (ie. James Brown's "Funky Drummer", Barry White's "I'm Gonna Love You", Sly Stone's "Sing a Simple Song", and most recently, Incredible Bongo Band's "Apache", which was used by Nas for "Made You Look").
I feel sampling is an artform, but credit must be given when it's due. The best sampling producers are the ones who chop samples up so well that even the person who wrote the original doesn't even know it's their record being used. DJ Premier, the Beatminers, Pete Rock, Diamond D., and Large Professor are masters at this. I've learned from a friend of mine that not getting samples cleared is always more expensive than paying to get them cleared. As far as house music, many samples aren't cleared because the target audience is not as large, so the risk isn't as great. But still give credit when it's due. Who was the guys that got sue by Steely Dan(I think they won) for sampling 'Black Cow'? </font>[/QUOTE]You're talking about Lord Tariq and Peter Gunns (Uptown Baby). Steely Dan got ALL of the publishing for that tune and $250,000. Without "Black Cow", there would be no "Uptown Baby". The importance of a loop in song is also crucial to how much should be paid to the songwriter. And some songwriters never give the thumbs up for their material to be sampled (Madonna, Sade, Luther Vandross). Michael Jackson and Prince only recently have lessened their sample restrictions. But like I said earlier, most samples that are used on records made widely available are going through sample clearance, whether it's house or hip-hop.

[Fletch]

Does Rick James have publishing control over his records at Motown. Or is that all Jobete (Motown's publishing arm)?

Why would anyone sample without clearing from Jobete. That's a powerful publishing company. Peace.

[Fletch]

Originally posted by djmarbll:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JR JAM:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by djmarbll:
Godd thought Bold Soul.
Because of Biz Markie (taking a Mel Torme sample without giving credit) and De la Soul (taking a Turtles sample without credit), any sample (2- bars) or longer used on any record that came out after 1990 had to have sample clearance or could face a lawsuit, like MC Hammer did with Rick James over "Can't Touch This", which was so blatantly ripped from "Superfreak" that Hammer should have worn a dunce cap for that year for not consulting Rick first. Before 1990, any sample was fair game without having to get clearance. This is why if you listen to a lot of the hip-hop from the "Golden Age" (roughly 1986-1989) there's samples all over the place because there was no restriction. Nowadays, ANY recognizable loop, hook, or vocal sample must be cleared no matter how short or long it is if the producer or artist doesn't wanna face legal ramifications down the road. In some cases even the drum break must be cleared (ie. James Brown's "Funky Drummer", Barry White's "I'm Gonna Love You", Sly Stone's "Sing a Simple Song", and most recently, Incredible Bongo Band's "Apache", which was used by Nas for "Made You Look").
I feel sampling is an artform, but credit must be given when it's due. The best sampling producers are the ones who chop samples up so well that even the person who wrote the original doesn't even know it's their record being used. DJ Premier, the Beatminers, Pete Rock, Diamond D., and Large Professor are masters at this. I've learned from a friend of mine that not getting samples cleared is always more expensive than paying to get them cleared. As far as house music, many samples aren't cleared because the target audience is not as large, so the risk isn't as great. But still give credit when it's due. Who was the guys that got sue by Steely Dan(I think they won) for sampling 'Black Cow'? </font>[/QUOTE]You're talking about Lord Tariq and Peter Gunns (Uptown Baby). Steely Dan got ALL of the publishing for that tune and $250,000. Without "Black Cow", there would be no "Uptown Baby". The importance of a loop in song is also crucial to how much should be paid to the songwriter. And some songwriters never give the thumbs up for their material to be sampled (Madonna, Sade, Luther Vandross). Michael Jackson and Prince only recently have lessened their sample restrictions. But like I said earlier, most samples that are used on records made widely available are going through sample clearance, whether it's house or hip-hop. </font>[/QUOTE]I've only remember at least ONE Luther tune get sampled: Don't You Know That. I think Heavy D did it (forgot the name of his tune. Got Me Waiting?).

Oh, yeah, vaguely remember someone sampling Never Too Much (was it Blackstreet?).

Uncle Ronnie (Luther) ain't havin' it! Peace.

[Skip Intro]

Well it's nice to some will actually touch this one - I noticed some hesitation. It's the hypocrisy that gets to me. How can one be complaining about bootlegging when even a fraction of their sound is culled from existing music? I love Moodymann's music. But I don't know how in good conscience he or anyone could sample and at the very least not credit. Yes, he's more creative in the implementation but I would think with his knowledge and appreciation of the old, he would do the right thing. I realize house is not the big $ earner that hip-hop is but I would like to think there is more integrity here. I love seeing old cats play. I'll drop $35 to hear a Pharoah Sanders, Gary Bartz, or Lou Donaldson and feel good about it. I have so much love for what they gave us. These guys and too many others got f**ked back in the day by labels. And when they get sampled now unknowingly they get f**ked again.

[ivanjb]

Queen - Another One Bites The Dust

There must be 40 -50 old rap records that used that bassline.

But studio musicians would re-play the entire instrumental in most cases.

Like Began Cekic (One Way Records) who did some of the illest bootlegs ever replaying the entire piece with studio musicians.

He did remakes of -
MFSB - "Love is the Message" (Tee Scott mixed this down)
Sting - "Voices Inside My Head"
Queen - "Another One Bites The Dust"

[ June 17, 2003, 10:06 AM: Message edited by: ivanjb ]

[jurren]

the trouble with sueing someone for using a fragment of your work is that in most if not all cases, the costs for legal actions are almost always higher then the financial harm it inflicts on the copyright owner. hence hardly anyone sues.

does that make the use of a sample any less stealing?

no.

but there's also artists that don't mind anyone using their work to create something new. the fact that these artists choose not to start a case against someone who uses their work to make a new work, means that the line between illegal use of samples and not-illegal use of samples becomes less clear to the public. hence people will see the illegal use of a sample that's not worth fighting over financially as not-illegal.
[i use the word not-illegal because it is illegal, but because the original artist doesn't oppose to it *ever* it loses it's illegal character.]

my personal point on sampling:

i love it!

thanks to people like carl craig, moodymann and madlib i'm 'discovering' loads and loads of records that i'd otherwise never would have even found out about.

i think artists that use sample shouldn't be secrative about it either, they're usually allready to the advantage that their output is so low that they'll never face a lawsuit, at least let everyone know where the inspiration came from.

big up to stones throw records for their policy regarding the work of the original artists. just take a look at that 'funky 16 corners' project they did a year or 2 ago.

jurren

[The Donger]

Originally posted by Mykhal:
Well it's nice to some will actually touch this one - I noticed some hesitation. It's the hypocrisy that gets to me. How can one be complaining about bootlegging when even a fraction of their sound is culled from existing music? I love Moodymann's music. But I don't know how in good conscience he or anyone could sample and at the very least not credit. Yes, he's more creative in the implementation but I would think with his knowledge and appreciation of the old, he would do the right thing. I realize house is not the big $ earner that hip-hop is but I would like to think there is more integrity here. I love seeing old cats play. I'll drop $35 to hear a Pharoah Sanders, Gary Bartz, or Lou Donaldson and feel good about it. I have so much love for what they gave us. These guys and too many others got f**ked back in the day by labels. And when they get sampled now unknowingly they get f**ked again. Remember that many of these old artists don't own thier music, so it aint like they are getting paid for it. The drummer is still hungry when some fat cat is still getting paid off of them. So I can see why someone may avoid crediting an artist. So I think it's the fear that once you credit an artist, that some publishing company will find out (through a middle person or "rat" that wants a cut) and come after you. Some asshole business guy who can't even identify a sample of the music he may have ownership of will make a buck off that shit.

Nowadays I hear about people getting "ownership" over your music if you can't afford to pay for your samples. Some small time kid recently sampled Hendrix for some beat, then someone took ownership over his music and ended up selling it to some people for a commercial and they made crazy bank off of this kid's music.


Mykhal, you like graffiti don't you? Isn't it wrong to **** with someone else's property? I'll take Subway train art over some canvas any day of the week. I know it's wrong, but I still like it, and I still like good sampling.

Bootlegging is entirely stealing someone else's song and selling the song in it's completed form. That's a bit different than reworking old sounds and turning them into new ideas...

[SHEIK YERBOUTI]

On a side note, I believe Anita Baker is EXTREMELY ANTI-sampling. Last time I checked, nothing had changed. Don't even ask for a sample clearance.

I found a book written by an entertainment lawyer about the legal ramifications of sampling. I can't remember the name and a buddy of mine has my copy. He broke the laws down very well, and even explained the payment structures and such.

At the end of the book he even printed the Biz Markie court ruling.

[ June 17, 2003, 10:26 AM: Message edited by: toomuchtv ]

[Moksha]

I think I heard that Kenny Dope barely saw a penny of The Bomb...as most of the money had to go to Chicago.

I think that there are some distinct differences between sampling and bootlegging that make them unfair to compare so directly. Sampling is using various sources to create something new. If I cut out hundred of pictures from magazines, newspapers, etc. and used them to create an inspired collage that had a meaning separate from the originals...I think there is some real merit to that. Sure...other photographers actually took those photos...but I was the one that artistically put them into a new context.

Bootlegging is straight-up stealing.

[kev]

Another argument would be that sampling has revamped alot of careers (artists and musicians who would've been completely forgotten otherwise). Case in point, would David Axelrod be as popular today if sampling didn't exist? Probably not.

I like sampling if it's done creatively. A good example would be Paul C. He would take a kick drum from one record, a snare from another, a hi hat from another, a bassline from another, etc., and stack them all on top of each other and make them sound like one loop.

[djfunq]

I just sample for fun, do not bring stuff out on labels or so, but yah gotta give the beginning and poor musicartist some credit, cause these hobby's are expensive! And ofcourse, if yah make a hit and there is big money involved, and they recognize the sample, and they come knocking on your door, well... SHARING is what yah gotta do! Note: I heard that there are lists of who'm you can sample for free and of who'm yah gotta pay. I always fully respect the exsisting song, so I edit and/or mix the sample that hard it won't be recognizeble, and if yah sample or remix an exsisting song for the better, hell yeah... why won't yah. Like I've said, I'm not a pro. it's just my thought. Peace,

[RX]

Originally posted by Mykhal:
Reading the bootlegging post got me thinking...

Where do you all stand on sampling??? sampling is responsible for carrying forth a beloved genre of mine - hip hop...my favorite group in the universe, de la, made sampling so legit in my eyes ONLY if it's performed the way they did it, which is to do the original song extreme justice...i liken sampling to doing covers of songs - luther does great justices to burt's songs, but not everyone can do the same...

however, when artist don't use samples, i am REALLY interested in what they are doing because originality is just not common in music...especially in hip-hop, non-sampling artists reign supreme, as in the neptunes...

as far as house goes, i have yet to encounter any song that samples that i have enjoyed...

[Huey P. Freeman]

My favorite sample of all time is the one in 93 Till Infinity-Souls Of Mischief. I used to know the name of the song it was sampled from but I forgot. graemlins/conf44.gif Without sampling hip hop would not exist. I remeber listening to WHPK one night and their hip hop show played the orignal songs and then the hip hop song with the sample all night. Most early hip hop sampled from other tunes.

[Huey P. Freeman]

Originally posted by Ms Rickey X:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Mykhal:
Reading the bootlegging post got me thinking...

Where do you all stand on sampling??? sampling is responsible for carrying forth a beloved genre of mine - hip hop...my favorite group in the universe, de la, made sampling so legit in my eyes ONLY if it's performed the way they did it, which is to do the original song extreme justice...i liken sampling to doing covers of songs - luther does great justices to burt's songs, but not everyone can do the same...

however, when artist don't use samples, i am REALLY interested in what they are doing because originality is just not common in music...especially in hip-hop, non-sampling artists reign supreme, as in the neptunes...

as far as house goes, i have yet to encounter any song that samples that i have enjoyed... </font>[/QUOTE]De La is also my favorite hip hop group of all time. graemlins/beerchug.gif Their live show is the bomb.

[kev]

Originally posted by Eargasm:
My favorite sample of all time is the one in 93 Till Infinity-Souls Of Mischief. I used to know the name of the song it was sampled from but I forgot.The name of the song is called "Heather". I think it's by Freddie Hubbard. The name of the album is "Crosswinds". You have to play the album on 45.

[Doug]

Originally posted by Orion:
I think I heard that Kenny Dope barely saw a penny of The Bomb...as most of the money had to go to Chicago.
Not true. Kenny definitely received some serious ends for this project, but mostly from licensing and sales royalties, not publishing.

[The Donger]

I heard he is a millionaire.

[RX]

Originally posted by Eargasm:
My favorite sample of all time is the one in 93 Till Infinity-Souls Of Mischief. I used to know the name of the song it was sampled from but I forgot. graemlins/conf44.gif Without sampling hip hop would not exist. I remeber listening to WHPK one night and their hip hop show played the orignal songs and then the hip hop song with the sample all night. Most early hip hop sampled from other tunes. hpk was a very intregal part in filling in my questions of what was sampled back in the day...definitely...

[dennis f]

sampling....hmmmm....I think if it's done tastefully then it's cool...just give credit to the original artist...but this depends on the length of it...If it's blatant then yeah your gonna have to up up some publishing. If it's like 1 bar give credit...anything less than that and it's just irrelevant in reality..
but I still think of it as money hungry bottom of the barrel feeding.....I mean if your record was shit and someone made a song with it in it and it was a 1 bar loop...i mean come on...really? Half of the chord progressions you've played someone's already done 80 times.....work out a simple agreement that hits you off with some loot if and only if it sells a crapload of records....
Seriously if anyone asked for permission for my stuff i'd be totally flattered and say yes....that someone thinks it's dope enough to use in their song is payment enough for me.....
oh by the way Kerri DID NOT sample Pat Metheny on that Large release...It was totally replayed. I know cuz i was there......Though it's kinda funny cuz Pat's people called and tried to say Kerri sampled the whole record. We were like "what the f*ck?.... doesn't Pat know his own record?" funny as hell but it was a testament to how close Kerri got it to sound.....

[dennis f]

Originally posted by Ghost Of Donger:
I heard he is a millionaire. not that it's any of my business...but

uh if he was...he wouldn't be doing house!!


just being realistic

laters

[lesysteme]

Originally posted by Ms Rickey X:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eargasm:
[qb] My favorite sample of all time is the one in 93 Till Infinity-Souls Of Mischief. I used to know the name of the song it was sampled from but I forgot. graemlins/conf44.gif Without sampling hip hop would not exist. I remeber listening to WHPK one night and their hip hop show played the orignal songs and then the hip hop song with the sample all night. Most early hip hop sampled from other tunes. it was billy cobham from album "crosswinds" its in the middle of the long track on side 2..they played it at 45...like they also did with freddie hubbards "sky dive" on the same release (93 til ..that is)

or it could be from the cobham LP spectrum, its been years since i found it..but yeah either of those 2 for that track.


peace