Re: (idm) samplers are evil, aren't they?

From Tom Millar
Sent Thu, Aug 12th 1999, 20:38

> Hey, this would be great because it would provide further support for the ongoing argument that SAMPLERS ARE EVIL and that the world would be a better place without them.

Dr. Purist: Arrgh! The Kumquat has again uncovered my secret plans! Curses!

> After all, we all know that HOW a piece of music is made is more important than the actual sound of the music itself.

The Kumquat's fists on Dr. Purist's ideological foundation: THUD, POW, SMACK

> For example, before even listening to a piece of music, it is best to verify that:
> 
> - no samplers were used, or were even present in the room during recording

More of the same: BIFF, WHACK

> - no DSP plug-ins were employed, since it is "too easy" to make cool-sounding effects with them

Dr. Purist: Never said anything about that, not me, wait, Ow!

> In fact, any device that makes it easier (god forbid) for Joe RaveKid to make cool tracks on his own (without racks of equipment and years of practice tweaking oscillators and filters) should be banned.

Well, there is the whole idea that you should challenge yourself when
creating art.
And it's pretty easy to detect when someone is not challenging
themselves. We call it "wanking."
You can wank with any piece of equipment. But remixing or covering tunes
without the use of any sampling methods is a challenge which should
hopefully cause the folks involved to get creative in new and
interesting ways, regardless of my personal artistic fear of the damn things.

> Hi, Tom!
Hi, Fred!

Tom