Sampling is lazy

>Sampling is lazy
>Sampling is plagiarism

Attached: 0433D54F-E642-4613-8001-E131B7A05664.png (645x968, 25K)

You're right

it isn't you fcking retard

a grand piano is a sampler prove me wrong

Samplers play back prerecorded segments. The piano creates its sounds organically by thwacking thick cords with a set of mallets.
inb4 “the recorded segment (the sample) is encoded in the thick cords. That is also a legitimate definition of a recording”
No it’s not. That’s dumb

>this sounds nice
>instead of being influenced from it and making some of my own music I'm just gonna download the song, rip the part I like, change the tempo, cut and paste different parts and call it my song
I can understand it being legal if the original artist approves of it, but there's absolutely no doubt that's it's the laziest form of music.

My kid was listening to lil peep one of these days, and when the only redeeming feature of your "song" is a Modest Mouse sample, I gotta say it's pretty damn lazy.

but I guess sampling just isn't the same these days, some genres do sampling better than others, and peep sucked.

I suppose that you think Stravinsky was a lazy hack when he quoted a theme from Schubert in his Cirkus Polka?

>not inventing your own instruments
>implying WAV is a less dynamic medium than air
>not appreciating DACs as being modern tonewoods
>i didn't steal this combination of notes because it's "music theory"

making your own song can be even lazier than making a good song using a sample you idiot