What do people mean when they talk about “good” and “bad” Sampling?

Can you guys make a beat as an example?

Here I'll post an example which is supported by this These are both Four Tet tracks, one of them is a studio album track and one is a track self-released by him that you can tell is pretty much a throwaway. You should be able to figure out which is which pretty easily
youtube.com/watch?v=QxzLEolVNzc
youtube.com/watch?v=ZGTnkrw3Tc0

>Good sampling
m.youtube.com/watch?v=NVVFvKYUAlo
>Bad sampling
m.youtube.com/watch?v=pwHuEDCM7xs

sure wyt
youtube.com/watch?v=y6120QOlsfU

If you're Diddy or Kanye you already paid for the rights to the song you're sampling so why not use as much of it as you're allowed to?

because you should have some artistic integrity

Attached: 1506260742268.png (1500x1900, 1.59M)

as with most aspects of music, it really depends on who you ask, the purpose/desired effect of the particular song, etc
here are a few things someone may use to evaluate the 'quality' of sampling in a given song though:
>the source of the sample
>what specific part of that source is used and how it is edited (literally how it is 'cut out' of the source, what fades are applied, etc)
>how sample is used in the construction of a new piece (repetition, how it contributes to the overall structure)
>how it is manipulated in the new context (reverb, compression, EQ, etc, etc)
this is a bigger question since mixing is quite a broad process but it is still highly 'subjective,' for lack of a better word
mixing is essentially the arrangement of all of the elements in the song through processes such as volume control, panning, EQing, spatial effects, etc

>good sampling
reinvents the original sample, subverts or twist it in a creative way, uses the sample as an instrument in and of itself
whosampled.com/The-Avalanches/Frontier-Psychiatrist/
whosampled.com/sample/229/Naughty-by-Nature-O.P.P.-The-Jackson-5-ABC/
whosampled.com/sample/753/Pras-Mýa-Ol'-Dirty-Bastard-Ghetto-Supastar-(That-Is-What-You-Are)-Kenny-Rogers-Dolly-Parton-Islands-in-the-Stream/
>bad sampling
a cheap call back, blatantly steals the hook uncreatively, gives you little reason to not just listen to the original
whosampled.com/Miley-Cyrus/We-Can't-Stop/
whosampled.com/Puff-Daddy/

azealia licensing lone tracks and rapping over them is the epitome of lazy """"sampling""""

stuff I like = good
stuff I don't like = bad

duh

Is the ASMZ sample in Injury Reserve bas sampling?

From a financial perspective, there's no incentive to not use as much as possible, it just makes for a bad song. It's one of many reasons the current laws surrounding sampling cripple it as a artistic tool.

this isn't your song... this came out like ages ago idiot. we're not dumb

That wouldn't be called sampling, she literally rapping over the beat. If she paid for the rights, it's not really a problem isn't it?

you got me

cringe, neck yourself

very bad

Idk

based

To me, a good sample has to be transformative, and to me, that means it has to re-contextualize the source material. for example, many people say that A$AP Rocky's sample of that Moby song was non-transformative. I disagree. Even though he just added drums over the riff from a really popular song, the fact that he turned a Moby song into a pop rap banger means that he's brought the sound to a new context; the A$AP song will have a different appeal than the Moby song. However, looping the main riff from a popular song is still kinda lazy. Re-contextualizing makes sampling "transformative" in my opinion, but that doesn't make it great, or even up to the standards of the best samplers out there.

When I'm sampling, I try to do two things:
1. Find unique source material. Nobody wants to hear you flip a song by Michael Jackson, especially if you're just going to loop it. Now, if you find something weird and obscure, you can get away with letting it just loop, because the fact that you found musicality in that loop is cool, too, though preferably, you still wouldn't just loop it.
2. As mentioned before, avoid simple loops. Chop it up, add effects, do something. You can take any song you want and the world and, with enough trial and error and a little bit of random chance, make it into something you never would've even predicted.

That's my opinion on this. Others' may disagree, but I'm pretty liberal about sampling. With all that being said, fuck Die Antwoord for that Aphex Twin sample, that shit should be punished with lashings.

good sampling: you use the sample to create a new song

bad sampling: that 90s song that is Puff Daddy rapping over Every Breath you Take, or that Kanye song that is him rapping over Daft Punk's harder better faster stronger.
people liked those songs because of every breath you take and harder better faster stronger, not because of the nigga talking fast over them

>Kanye song that is him rapping over Daft Punk's harder better faster stronger.
He basically made a new song out of those vocal samples. Far from bad.

it's immediately recognizable as another song that was a pretty big international hit

Here's a good example:
youtube.com/watch?v=mVKIva2KddY

Counter argument: J-Dilla, Nujabes (asian but point still stands)

Attached: 2eMOR.jpg (500x375, 31K)

But it isn’t bad when the music doesn’t even come from Harder Better Faster. I don’t get the hate for this song.

based and truthpilled

youtube.com/watch?v=R-QS4CTtltg