----- Original Message ----- From: "Matt MacQueen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "MM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[email protected]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 2:27 AM Subject: Re: (313) "Jaguar" Strings on 80s House record?
> I mean, go dig out Jaguar again and tell me that's a sample... IMHO > there is no way. Have you ever tried to sample stuff and use it in a > track? There's extraordinary difficulty in finding a clean enough > version of that string part of the track to be able to sample it and > make Jaguar with it. Still, everyone's ears are subjective and it's > something neither of us can conclusively prove one way or the other. > :) Exactly. If someone doesn't want to buy that it can't be a sample based on technical or melodic considertions, the argument remains the two ships passing in the night that it is. However, there is 99.99999999999999999999999999999% no way it could have been sampled, either because of the derth of other sounds cluttering those strings throughout, or because (to my ears), there is not a single point in the original where a string plays 1 sustained monotone note, and if you sample the chord, you can't reconstruct a 'normal' sounding chord out of where it came from, which is precisely how Jaguar is constructed. This is a hard-fast technical limitation of sampling in my experience, unless there is something huge I am missing. It's chords throughout, except for maybe that little 5-note trill that everyone's sweating at the beginning of the phrase, which no one is disputing sounds nearly identical, but that doesn't mean it's a sample, for all the reasons above. Pedant #85372672904321 ======= Text/Mixes/Pics: http://www.phonopsia.co.uk Music: http://www.mp313.com Contact: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
