someone brought up a really good point in this thread. illegal
samples are used pretty frequently by artists, including moodymann
and theo parrish. now i find it slightly hypocritical to be
jacking someone else's stuff and then not allowing your stuff to
be jacked. but thats not my main point in this argument.
thats getting into gray area...there is a legal free usage of samples but i
think it is limited to 2 seconds. ?? and to me this is apples and oranges
anyways...using samples, illegal or not, is not the same as stealing someone
else's entire creation outright...altho it can sure get pretty close
sometimes with lazier producers...this gets into the whole other discussion
of using samples creatively or using them blatantly, whole other
argument...apples and oranges..
my main point is this: limited releases purposely limited are
elitist. i cant understand why something as populist as dance
who knows why things are limited tho. maybe the label just doesnt have the $
to press more. maybe the label just doesnt WANT to spend the money to press
more. maybe the label doesnt think the music is that good to justify
pressing more -- not their fault if record collectors decide that the
limited run makes it better. maybe the artist doesnt like the music that
much and doesnt want it to be a widespread release. maybe distributors dont
pre-order many copies. to assume it's elitism is quite an assumption. there
are a lot more mechanics in running a label and releasing music than just
scene politics! and to speculate the reasons is pointless imo. furthermore
when things are hyped up as "limited!" you should not assume that was a
decision by the artist or label to market it that way. it's the job of
distributors and stores to sell records. there can be a complicated mixture
of business and art and personalities involved.
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
