Why do people act like future funk is acceptable? Do they not

poor bait m8

>>72227529
The battle over sampling was an intellectual battle that was fought and won in the 1970s. You lost before you were born. Get the fuck over it.

Because muh aesthedick.

>>72227615
There's a HUGE difference between plunderphonics/sampling used in hip hop and... "future funk".

>>72227615
I'd agree with you if the samples weren't so lazily done. Fuck you.

>>72227645
>>72227674
For the purposes of this discussion (deciding whether or not it's "stolen,") it doesn't matter whether the sampling is good.

>>72227741
Right, nor was that the point I was making. In most sample-based music the sample is modified enough from the original to constitute a level of composition or musical thought. Taking the entire sample and leaving it to play, a la future funk, is neither of those.

>>72227832
The recontextualization happens in the album art and presentation.

>>72227832
I used to actually be a pretty big fan of vaporwave and futurefunk till I realized that its just slowed down 80s samples with bad techno superimposed. I don't think it is fully devoid of artistic merit but its not great music.

>>72227898
Neither of which are musicianship.

>>72227898
The "presentation" is a shitty Tumblr-tier gif of Sailor Moon or Lum.

>>72227925
So? It's art.

>>72227923
I'll credit Macross and Saint Pepsi for actually moving on to make original tracks. But it's their earlier stuff that remains popular, which is backwards as hell.

I agree, it's shitty, lazy, etc.
And I enjoy it.

>>72227956
And I'm not talking about "art". I'm talking about the way albums like Sailorwave or Hit Vibes are treated like compositions from the names Macross and Saint Pepsi, which they should not be, because it's not theirs.

>>72227998
True that, snorting ketamine all night and listening to future funk

>>72228029
Who cares whose it is?

>>72228029
they're not treated like compositions, they're treated like productions.
They're referred to as music producers. Cause they produce music, they don't compose it.

>>72228134
I do.

>>72228179
OK, grandpa.

>>72227960
Saint Pepsi's chillwave stuff is really mediocre compared to what he did with futurefunk

He deserves to be lauded for his choice of samples more than for the music he composed and played.

>>72228190
Hey, instead of ad hominem, how about you explain how the notion of giving proper credit to musical artists is flawed?

yeah but hit vibes is good tho.

i enjoy listening to it.

its better to dance to than the original tracks and serves a (slightly) different musical purpose

>>72227529
t. indie "artist" whose bandcamp gets no plays

>>72228029
i can't believe AC/DC walks around playing songs with instruments they didn't even invent

>>72228243
music is cheap entertainment, it's freely available in massive amounts, to the point where the people who bring it to you matter at least as much as the people who make it.

Credit just doesn't really matter to the listener.

>>72228249
Empire Building >>>>>>>> Hit Vibes

>>72228249
This is true actually, as you might look stupid dancing to I Wanna Be With You instead of Fun Tonight - but still, the latter is a half hearted DJ's mix of the former, and NOT a song that could ever be rightfully credited to said mixer, so it shouldn't be treated that way.

>>72228283
This simply equates future funk to big industry pop music, which doesn't exactly help its case.

>>72228335
I didn't say that future funk specifically is cheap entertainment, I said that MUSIC is cheap entertainment.

And let's not forget that 99% of futurefunk samples big industry pop music of the 80s.

"its just slowed down 80s music" is the "wrestling is fake" of vaporwave

>>72228383
but listen to a song like enjoy yourself. the source material sounds basically nothing like the end product. its such a different feeling too

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hI0qMtdfng

>>72228335
>NOT a song that could ever be rightfully credited to said mixer, so it shouldn't be treated that way.
maybe but you don't have the right to annoy us with your moral qualms just because you think it matters.

>>72228395
holy shit this is so fucking well put

>>72227529
Like all sampled music, there is the good and the bad.

>>72228280
That comparison is inaccurate. A guitar is an avenue for infinite melodic lines, etc. A sample has to be modified in order to recreate this value. This is not the case for future funk.

>>72228383
City pop and 7's typically had far fewer writers than today and weren't explicitly made just to make money. But anyway, that's beside the point. Music is cheap entertainment, yes, but it undoubtedly inspires and injects feelings in listeners, and if there's a positive takeaway from a song, the acknowledgement for it should go to the right person.

>>72228476
And you don't have to participate in this discussion if you don't want to.

>>72228335
how is there not a material and significant difference between the original and the "future funk" version of a song? its kind of obvious if you listen to both.

If it's not then you can just say you don't "get" future funk and walk away, just like any genre that might be outside of your wheelhouse.

I think this really comes down to a matter of taste and you getting enraged that people don't share yours

>>72228029
I guess by that logic World's End Rhapsody isn't a Nujabes song

>>72228554
I'm not annoyed if people are aware of the minimal changes and still have a reason to say that's fine, etc. Because that's all the basis of a debate/argument. I'm more annoyed at the general idea that people AREN'T aware of it.

>>72228395
underrated

>>72228631
?? who the fuck isn't aware of that ??

>>72228243
the fact that its sampled music is embedded in the genre of vaporwave itself. everyone understands this and it doesnt even need to be mentioned. if you want to know the samples' origins, go on whosampled or ask someone online. its not like vaporwave artists are hiding their sources hoping youll think they wrote everything; if anything they want people to look up the original samples.

>>72228542
>This is not the case for future funk.
For bad futurefunk, sure. It just adds an obnoxious beat over it
Good futurefunk transforms the source material to the point where you don't get the same experience.
>And you don't have to participate in this discussion if you don't want to.
I'm mostly just trying to make you understand that you should stop trying to have this conversation, cause it just makes you come off as an oblivious dick.

>>72228316

hmm

a nice try, but missed the mark

i believe those arrows are the wrong way around

>>72228661
Then explain why I'm an oblivious dick, don't just state it or you look hypocritical.

Now yes, there are good future funk releases like Pure Pure EP, stuff that the artist definitively wrote themselves and that they can say is their brainchild. Unfortunately this is not the stuff that ends up bringing them success.

>>72228733
Hit vibes sounds too modern, and the samples just aren't as varied and fun-sounding.

>>72228655
there are albums like this: http://esprit.100percentelectronica.com/album/virtua-zip

that try to distinguish themselves by NOT sampling, bringing some attention to this whole deal

>>72228788
what do you mean by too modern?

hit vibes is so much more fun, you can put it on at a party and you can dance to it and sing along

empire building is like, slightly worse macintosh plus

I have to head out, couldn't respond to everyone. But thanks for sharing ideas and such, decent discussion overall.

>>72228764
[not that dude but] basically your argument is "bad future funk is morally bankrupt"

which like everyone agrees with, just no one cares

there's plenty of shitty rock bands that play the same 4 chord songs that have existed for decades, and although guitars have their "infinite melodic possibilities," most people think of it as similar -- bad music is bad and who gives a shit. you don't need to shit on a whole genre for some bad apples

>>72228764
>wrote themselves
>brainchild
Look, we've all been trying to explain you for a long time that nobody gives a shit whether futurefunk producers write their own music or just sample it, because it really doesn't matter, because none of them insist on calling it "their brainchild" or whatever bullshit romantic cliché you want them to believe in.

You're the only one who seems to think that originality is important here. That's why you sound oblivious. And you're apparently trying to convince us that it is important, even though it obviously isn't. That's why you sound like a dick.

>>72228841
Empire building has better samples, that carry more intense moods, and most importantly it doesn't even remotely sound like cheap French House, which is sometimes the case with Hit Vibes.
Futurefunk that sounds too much like it was made in this century (and geared towards the tastes of millenials) is just aesthetically jarring and obnoxious.

Hit Vibes kiiind of tends to lean towards that kind of jarring tone at times, whereas Empire Building never does.

>>72228857
faggot

>>72227529
Recontextualisation

>>72229110
this

ya know what? I honestly dont' give a fuck. it's enjoyable. me and my huge cock will continue to listen to it and not give a single shit

>>72229022
agree to disagree.

both good ass albums though

File: WAKE UP.png (226KB, 468x345px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 468x345px

>when u realize that martial industrial is just futurefunk made out of war movie soundtracks

It's basically remastered disco, who gives a shit where it came from? It's all public domain by now anyway or it fucking should be.