so guys im doing an essay for class and im kinda stumped on finding some evidence on samples that support my thesis (New technological advances in the music industry are creating an unfair advantage which is leading to false talent.) so i realize that this argument can go either way, and no im not looking for a brawl of opinions cause im on both sides for this one, but however i am exploring the point of that the use of samples and loops are falsifying music in a way that less and less talent is required to actually be (or appear to be) a good musician on a wide scale.

so in essence, can you guys pitch me some ideas or reasons why you think (or someone else if you can find it drop a link!) that samples and loops are creating an unfair advantage that takes away from real talent in the music industry, that be a great help!

on a side note, while i think that loops and samples can count as "cheating" in a way i also believe that they can add much dynamic and texture to music which is pushing the boundaries to create more and more, complex and chart toping music, everything has a middle balance that can either be employed or abused.
Last edited by -x-ERic-x- at Oct 15, 2009,
That's stupid, I can only think of things that DON'T support it.
I think you should write about drum sampling as in programs like Addictive drums and Drumkit from hell which are replicating full drum kit sounds almost to perfection. So I can sit in my study, program drums all day by clicking squares on a timeline instead of learning drums for 8 or so years and also the quality is amazing considering even if I did have a drumkit and was skilled, my drumkit would not sound professional at all.
Since I believe my intelligence has been attacked, this looks to me to be a perfect example to redeem myself in your (seemingly omniscient) eyes.

To be able to justify a statement as bold as "samples and loops are creating an unfair advantage that takes away from real talent in the music industry", you must first define "real talent". Believe it or not, talent is a subjective word, particularly when it comes to the creative arts. What is talent to you is certainly not talent to the next musician. By talent, you could mean a number of things: technical skill, songwriting skill, application and knowledge of music theory, etc...
I understand that you say that you think it can "go both ways", but you're really going to have to specify in which cases the use of new technology can be good, and in which cases it is bad and why. If you're going to support the statement that " loops and samples can count as 'cheating'", you're really going to need to explain your point of view. If you mean technical skill when you say skill, then I think I should point out that neither loopers nor any pedals can be used to fake technical skill (unless you simply mean speeding up recordings, but there's nothing new about that), especially not in a gigging situation. If, on the other hand, you mean songwiting skill, then I need to point out that, if anything, it could be argued that new technology like loopers and all sorts of unconventional effects add to the palette of sounds available to a musician, and that they provide opportunities for songwiters to create sounds that were previously impossible to create. A skilled songwriter will be able to incorporate such devices into his/her array of sounds, whereas an unskilled one may not be capable of doing so effectively; in this case, it could be said that new technology allows some musicians to truly demonstrate their ability to compose. In addition, loopers provide the possibility of "jamming" alone, which means that some artists who would usually not be able to craft songs without the aid of other band members are able to write music on their own. Lastly, if by skill you actually mean knowledge of theory, then I can't think of anything that could realistically support the statement that technology creates the illusion of talent, since a musician who does not understand how notes relate to each-other still will not understand how notes relate to each-other, no matter how much technology is used.

Also, I think it's really important to point out to you that for anything to be "unfair", it must not give everyone an equal opportunity. Last I looked, anyone with $100 USD can walk into a store and purchase a cheap looper, so I don't really think the statement that "samples and loops are creating an unfair advantage" can be supported by any means. As far as I can tell, anyone who honestly believes (and I'm not saying that you do; I realise that this is all part of a school assignment) that they are creating an unfair advantage simply doesn't know how to incorporate loops into their music, or else plays a genre of musical that doesn't ordinarily rely on loops, causing them to dismiss it as "not real music", the same way that a classical or jazz musician would dismiss many heavy metal techniques as "not music".
Last edited by toyboxmonster at Oct 16, 2009,