The Amen Break, the most important 6-second drum loop ever

[And That]

derivative is considered an insulting word in artistic circles. I even looked it up to make sure my sense of the definition was correct, and it is.

The definition you quoted fits your needs, but it certainly isn't the only definition. I usually think of derivatives as more mathematical in nature than anything else. Now if math offends artistic circle, I can't control that.

 

[And That]

But you just said 99.9% of music (the same percentage you said was derivative) is chaff (in other words, garbage). How is it not thus reasonable to assume that you were arguing: derivative equals not good.

To quote myself:

That's not to say that the 10 albums you picked out weren't really good and enjoyable to listen to. Good musicianship and songwriting skill always have their own merits. But there are almost always extremely derivative.

 

[craigharmann]

However, I defy you to name one person in the past 100 years who created a (wholly) new instrument and also then created great music for it.

Technically speaking, the synthesizer was a new instrument in the past 100 years....along with the electric guitar, even though the acoustic guitar has been around for many years. One of the interesting things I saw in studying music theory in college was that up until about the turn of the 20th century, there were typical forms and styles to follow, and then in the 20th century, there were many attempts to break the rules and create music (if that's what you want to call some of it) that either stretched, broke, or created new rules. It's hard to compare Schonberg to Bach, but they're both music.

[JoeHova]

I know there have been new instruments, but were the inventors of those also great artists? Maybe Les Paul, I guess, but an electric guitar is derivative of an acoustic one.

 

and as for the meaning of derivative, we're discussing art, aren't we? I don't see why you would imply I'm selectively using a definition to suit my needs when using derivative in conjunction with (a specific piece of) art would almost always be seen as insulting.

 

******That's not to say that the 10 albums you picked out weren't really good and enjoyable to listen to. Good musicianship and songwriting skill always have their own merits. But there are almost always extremely derivative. ******

 

yes, you said that, but it appeared to be quite different than what you would consider great art.

 

you also said this: "Virtually everything is derivative. That's why great art is so rare. " Once again, you seem to imply that great art can not be derivative or influenced by other artists.

[JoeHova]

as an aside, sorry for using asterisks to quote posts, but Yuku doesn't work very well with Safari. I even have to manually enter the carriage returns.

[And That]

Once again, you seem to imply that great art can not be derivative or influenced by other artists.

Since I am going to once again quote myself, I will bow out of this:

Within great works, the tiny inventions are usually what make them great.

Most of the great works are derivative to a large degree. It's the little things, the changes, the new ideas, that make the difference.

[JoeHova]

OK, you said that, but later and after you had said several other things that strongly suggested you considered being influenced by something disqualifying in terms of great art.

 

I mean, you just said that the .01% of music that isn't derivative is the only reason to listen to music (or pay attention to art in general). Can you really not see why I would take that as you saying that the rest is junk or, at the very least, disqualified from being great? I'm not trying to insult you or anything, I just disagreed with that sentiment for many reasons, some of which I mentioned in later posts. You then proceeded to somewhat modify what you said and say "tiny inventions" are what make things great. However, depending on what you mean by invention, what you are saying may still not be all that different from what you first said.

[sbrylski]

Yes, everything is derviative, where we differ is whether something being influenced by something else disqualifies it from being great art.

I also never said that. Within great works, the tiny inventions are usually what make them great.

 

For example, the buzzing on the low E string in Sister Golden Hair makes that song the coolest song ever. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/smile.gif

 

[GAME05]

Are there any guitar riffs that don't have their beginnings in Blind Willie Johnson or Son House or Charley Patton or Robert Johnson or Tommy Johnson or Skip James? And didn't those guys get those from traveling musicians, who probably got them from even earlier musicians and so on? Any basic drum beat has probably been around for thousands of years.

 

i can't speak for the chords, but i know the lyrical progression came from "callers," slaves working in the fields who'd lead everyone else in singing. Callers were more valuable at auction for that skill. That blues song at the end of The Jerk is a good example.

 

thanks for that post. despite being busy at work, that was a full hour of digging into that subject. really cool.

[flosses like fossas]

hooray for nitpicking and philosophical runabouts!

[True CryM]

Thanks for the post, Brian. I'm not sure where this thread is going, but the "golden age" of hip-hop was almost solely based on breaks. Hell, the first expressions of hip-hop music were DJ's looping breaks every 20 to 30 seconds.

[Brian the Automator]

hooray for nitpicking and philosophical runabouts!

Yeah, to me, music is just a way to put emotion in your ear hole. Once it's in there, it's completely about what mood you want to be in and what works for you. Sometimes I like meaningful artsy crap, other times I just want something to groove to (primarily the latter). Everything else, to me at least, seems like analysis paralysis and has nothing to do with emotion...

 

[nohopspanther]

Good composers write, great composers steal. As the old joke in Music School composition classes goes, a Grad student waited until the last minute to write his final piece for his Masters of Composition degree and thinking he was slick went to the library and using his Professor's orchestral work, did a retrograde inversion the final night and turned in his work to the jury panel of music prof's. After 2 minutes of looking through his compositions, the professor's told him that his work was no big deal since he simply copied down by hand Beethoven's 3rd Symphony.

[nohopspanther]

****There are only as many instruments, chords and notes as we limit ourselves to having.****

 

True enough, at least in a linear sense. However, I defy you to name one person in the past 100 years who created a (wholly) new instrument and also then created great music for it.

 

 

****And of course my argument isn't specifically about music. Virtually everything is derivative. That's why great art is so rare. ****

 

Yes, everything is derviative, where we differ is whether something being influenced by something else disqualifies it from being great art. No director has ever been a great artist since Luis Le Prince? No Poet has ever been great? No novelist since Apuleius?

The steel pan having been invented approximately 70 years ago as the newest pitched instrument in Trinidad and Tobago is in the last 100 years and has a virtuoso Liam Teague who teaches the NIU steel band. I think if you look up his credits and some videos on youtube you will change your tune.

 

[JoeHova]

No, what I meant was, has the inventor of an instrument ever also been a great artist on that instrument? I've no doubt the first guy that tuned up the bottom of an oil drum was a good drummers. However, is a steel drum really totally different from any other drum? And if it is, did that same guy create great art for it?

[brewizard]

I guess my point is that saying something has been influenced by something else is hardly an insult, in my opinion. By using the epithet "derivative", however, you are appearing to dismiss the vast majority of human culture.

 

The way I see it, "influenced by" and "derived from" are the almost the same thing, but there is an important difference.

 

Every human being is unique, and that means artists and musicians too. However, they're all still human, and they all fall into human patterns. One basic human pattern is to absorb and be influenced by what one sees. Monkey see, monkey do.

 

All the great artists of the 20th century were influenced by somebody, and they created art which was somewhat derived from the art that came before them.

 

However, what is unique and relevant about digital sampling is that it allows people to actually use actual pieces of the original copyrighted commercial art to create a new copyrighted commercial art. In this case, "derivative" is a completely appropriate description. This derivative art is something which copyright laws were enacted precisely to protect against. So, yes. Hip-hop and rave culture are based on a derivative art which was created and is apparently sustained through outlawism. Basically the video argues at the end that the potential commercial value of this kind of derivative outlawism outweighs the commercial value of the original copyright.

 

I disagree. I think derivative outlawism in art leads to boring, derivative artistic culture. Why? In this case, the worldwide fascination with that six seconds of the Amen-break, recorded in 1969, has led to many years of derivative artistic navel gazing. Using the Amen break over and over and over and over and over again in modern recording is the artistic equivalent of replacing the world's library books with the Cliff's notes. It is ultimately artistically lazy, and leads to overindulgent, unlistenable crud. On a worldwide scale. Even the video's author seemed to agree on that point.

 

Don't agree that derivative outlawism leads to boring, derivative artistic culture? Ever seen a graffiti artist that blew your mind with originality?

 

I personally wish the lawyers had stepped in in the early eighties and shut this stuff down. If they had, we wouldn't currently be in the position of having to "dismiss the vast majority of human culture" as derivative. Why recording producers can't just hire a drummer is beyond me. Oh, right. According to the video, it was because it was cheaper and easier to make these sampled recordings for the club-scene. Basically, the artistic musical value received by the listener was thus reduced by sampling because the artist could 'sample it in the morning, press it in the afternoon, and give it to a DJ that night.' Imagine if the Beatles had recorded Sgt. Peppers in a day. It would have sucked. It would, by the nature of the time frame of its production, have been much more derivative.

 

Fascinating video. Fascinating subject. Thank god for copyright laws, lawyers and big corporations. That derivative hip-hop explosion won't happen again. Whew.

[nohopspanther]

No, what I meant was, has the inventor of an instrument ever also been a great artist on that instrument? I've no doubt the first guy that tuned up the bottom of an oil drum was a good drummers. However, is a steel drum really totally different from any other drum? And if it is, did that same guy create great art for it?

There is almost no comparison of a steel pan to anything else in the percussion world. The layout of notes is insanely different when compared to any pitched instrument and yes the first person who managed to create and become the master tuner of drums did indeed play and write great music for pan. You have enough different voices among steel pans such as tenor, double tenors, bass and a myriad of others that it is routinely noted for being the most recent pitched instrument created. Not only that, virtuosic players are much fewer and farther between than any other instrument because of the relative lack of teachers and performers.

 

[True CryM]

I'm not sure if your statement is tongue-in-cheek, because I am in complete disagreement.

 

It is ultimately artistically lazy, and leads to overindulgent, unlistenable crud. On a worldwide scale. Even the video's author seemed to agree on that point.

 

Listen to the Squarepusher cut again and tell me it's artistically lazy. The author's point was to explain how over-protection leads to a sterile environment.

 

Don't agree that derivative outlawism leads to boring, derivative artistic culture? Ever seen a graffiti artist that blew your mind with originality?

 

I've seen many graffiti writings and showcases. And if that is your cup of tea, then yes, it would blow your mind with originality.

 

Why recording producers can't just hire a drummer is beyond me.

 

Even if you hire a drummer to play the Amen break, it still violates copyright rules.

 

Imagine if the Beatles had recorded Sgt. Peppers in a day.

 

I'm sure if they had the technology we have today, it would have been much quicker to record. And I don't think all the LSD helped production efficiency either.

 

Thank god for copyright laws, lawyers and big corporations. That derivative hip-hop explosion won't happen again. Whew.

 

Again, I don't know if this supposed to be in blue, but wow. Welcome to pop music nothingness.

[brewizard]

Welcome to pop music nothingness.

 

Already there, thanks to the cross pollenation of hip hop styled sampling.

 

Even if you hire a drummer to play the Amen break, it still violates copyright rules.

 

You miss the point entirely. Forget the Amen break already. A real drummer will, like a snowflake, be different. Human. Sampling, on the other hand, is essentially copying and pasting OTHER ARTIST'S WORK and running it through a computer to change it up - a process which - to me - produces the most sterilized, derivative sound yet. But that's just me.

 

I honestly don't understand the popularity of such sterile, derivative music.

[Baldkin]

Ever seen a graffiti artist that blew your mind with originality?

 

Yes.... Banksy.

[True CryM]

Already there, thanks to the cross pollenation of hip hop styled sampling.

 

Cross-pollination? You think sampling music caused the current state of pop music? Big corporations did that on their own.

A real drummer will, like a snowflake, be different.

 

Real drummer's don't play the same beats ever? Please. Just because you get a live drummer, doesn't mean you get an original sound every time.

[flosses like fossas]

hooray for nitpicking and philosophical runabouts!

Yeah, to me, music is just a way to put emotion in your ear hole. Once it's in there, it's completely about what mood you want to be in and what works for you. Sometimes I like meaningful artsy crap, other times I just want something to groove to (primarily the latter). Everything else, to me at least, seems like analysis paralysis and has nothing to do with emotion...

 

for reference, my post was not a potshot at the topic, but rather a sardonic poke at Hova vs. And That arguing originality and whatnot.

[TheCrew07]

This is one of my favorite threads of year thus far. The top ten VII sucked, too much going on with extra people and all the mistakes that were made, but the first 6 were good, the original video (now unavailable) was very thought provoking.

[Brian the Automator]

This is one of my favorite threads of year thus far. The top ten VII sucked, too much going on with extra people and all the mistakes that were made, but the first 6 were good, the original video (now unavailable) was very thought provoking.

The author mentioned that he wasn't happy with VII either, and was going to re-do it ASAP.

 

[brewizard]

Ever seen a graffiti artist that blew your mind with originality?

Yes.... Banksy.

 

Agreed. 100 percent. Wow. Thanks for the link. I can't help but notice how Banksy has his own style entirely. He's a non-derivative, fully evolved, original graffiti artist.

 

I have never personally encountered any graffiti like it anywhere - and I guess it shows there is an exception to everything under the sun. This is the graffiti I see:

 

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Arts/Arts_/Pictures/2007/09/24/graffiti460.jpg

 

Yuck.