In the second installment of our series addressing some technologies employed in modern music production. You may have heard of sampling; in the 80s and 90s there were a few court cases surrounding the sampling of music to create new recordings. So what is sampling?
Sampling is, in essence, recording something and then playing it back as part of a musical performance. For example, recording the sound of a flute playing and then playing it back through a keyboard. An early kind of sampler was the the Mellotron, which played back loops of tapes with recorded sounds. Each key on the keyboard played a different loop of tape. This is the sound you hear at the beginning of the Beatles’ “Strawberry Fields Forever”–a Mellotron loaded with tape loops of flutes. Even back then there was controversy surround this sort of thing–session musicians felt that this technology was robbing them of their livelihood. After all, why pay a group of musicians to play when you can just lug this Mellotron into the studio and play it yourself?
Sampling really came into full flower in the 80s with digital samplers that played back sounds with higher fidelity. Now it became possible to construct fairly realistic digital pianos that played back samples of real acoustic pianos, drum machines that played back samples of actual drums playing, etc. In fact, it became possible to construct songs entirely of sampled instruments. But sampling was taken even further when whole sections of songs started to be lifted off of recordings and redeployed as samples to create “new” songs. Often this was done without crediting the original writers and performers of the music, hence the court cases surrounding Vanilla Ice’s “Ice Ice Baby”, which sampled the main riff of Queen’s “Under Pressure”, and MC Hammer’s “Can’t Touch This”, which similarly lifted the main riff of Rick James’ “Superfreak”. The upshot of this is that the original artists now have to be credited and receive royalties for this sort of sampling.
As a musician, I have some serious issues with the use of sampled performances. To me, it’s kind of like taking a reproduction of a classic work of art, spraying some graffiti on it, and calling it your own work. In other words, it’s a shameless appropriation of the product of others’ labor and creativity. It’s possible to someone to sit in a chair in front of a computer, never touching an actual music instrument, and string together layers of sampled performances to create a new song. Some people make a career of doing just that. I don’t deny that doing it well requires creativity, but to me it’s much less interesting than hearing a performance of actual human musicians playing together. It’s analogous to collages made by cutting things out of books and magazines. It can be interesting, but I have greater respect for the Leonardos and Monets of the world.
That aside, sampling has been a boon to the low-budget DYI musician–it makes it possible to incorporate sampled instrumentation such as string sections and exotic instruments that would be cost prohibitive if one had to hire musicians to play them for you. Still, I won’t deny that it’s problematic in the sense that the proliferation of easily available sampled instruments has reduced the number of paying jobs for session musicians.