The Grey Album

[henryrobinett]

Originally posted by dahkter:

Just don't see how the legal system can stop this type of expression from becoming more and more common as it becomes easier to do this type of thing..

Two different things. What is right/wrong and what can be stopped. I never said anything about stopping or forcing people to stop. But one can make a moral stance about what is right. You can pass drug laws and that's not going to stop people from doing drugs.

 

All we have is our own moral code. As an artist I want to support other artist and their right to own their own creations. I'm not into ripping anybody off. Do I support making it illegal? Of course. Without written permission, to me it's theft, plain and simple. Do I expect the law to change anything? Probably not. But that's not why I support it.

[dahkter]

Yup,

I personally enjoy creating and listening to sample collage type music, if you made one track with samples from five different bands, and it works nicely together, is new and funky, I'd like to hear it.

But the moral argument/reality is definitely on point and cannot be countered...

So I guess less Acid, more synthesizers for a cleaner conscious....

[KenElevenShadows]

You can use Acid or other loop-based programs and even use sampling for creative means that do not use other artists' music. Loops and samples sometimes get a dirty name from their obvious uses. However, they can be used to create things from scratch and perform many creative things that are insanely clever, and not necessarily using other people's music.

[Kaz]

Originally posted by henryrobinett:

Don't make an enemy of your fellow artist. He's not the bad guy here.[/QB]

[Kaz]

Originally posted by dahkter:

Yup,

I personally enjoy creating and listening to sample collage type music, if you made one track with samples from five different bands, and it works nicely together, is new and funky, I'd like to hear it.

But the moral argument/reality is definitely on point and cannot be countered...

So I guess less Acid, more synthesizers for a cleaner conscious....

I think there are a lot of bands and artists with old recordings who would probably love to be sampled. The guy who wrote the Chi-Lites song sampled in Beyonce's song is probably pretty happy.

 

Also, I'm seeing a trend back to actually playing instruments and creating original music (in the genres that have been spending way too many years sampling and programming.)

[oliveloafe]

i downloaded it and listened to the whole thing a few times through.

i think it's fuckin awesome.

it's a music collage/mash up that works... and the beatles should be in public domain anyways these days.

the way some of you aging baby boomers speak of the beatles borders on religious fanaticism.

[Kaz]

Originally posted by oliveloafe:

i downloaded it and listened to the whole thing a few times through.

i think it's fuckin awesome.

it's a music collage/mash up that works... and the beatles should be in public domain anyways these days.

the way some of you aging baby boomers speak of the beatles borders on religious fanaticism.

Well I ain't no aging baby boomer. If you think it's fuckin awesome, good for you, you are easily entertained. The Beatles are just a band like any other when it comes to being ripped off. A five year old like yourself should be able to understand that. Copyrights last for something like 95 years. Why the fuck should The Beatles be treated any differently than any other band? Just because you think this lame mash-up is fuckin awesome? Grow up junior.

[oliveloafe]

Originally posted by zzzzzzzzz:

Originally posted by oliveloafe:

i downloaded it and listened to the whole thing a few times through.

i think it's fuckin awesome.

it's a music collage/mash up that works... and the beatles should be in public domain anyways these days.

the way some of you aging baby boomers speak of the beatles borders on religious fanaticism.

Well I ain't no aging baby boomer. If you think it's fuckin awesome, good for you, you are easily entertained. The Beatles are just a band like any other when it comes to being ripped off. A five year old like yourself should be able to understand that. Copyrights last for something like 95 years. Why the fuck should The Beatles be treated any differently than any other band? Just because you think this lame mash-up is fuckin awesome? Grow up junior.

hey-oh!

Listen pal, let it be known that I'm SIX AND A HALF not five... get it right OK?

Ahem. Let's see.

Taken from www.djdangermouse.com

"The Grey Album is an art project/experiment that uses the full vocal content of Jay-Z's Black Album recorded over new beats and production made using the Beatles White Album as the sole source material."

 

I'm inclined to believe Danger Mouse's intentions were artistic... he only printed up 3000 of em. And, like, since Sony/ATV/Michael Jackson/Paul/John/Whoever owns the Beatles catalouge, it seems like they would be fair game for an artistic project regardless of copyrights.

 

actually zzzzzzzzzzz, I'm 22. Why would i want to grow up? Look what happened to Paul! YIKES!

And oh, I'm just given the baby boomers some nuts over their all too frequent Beatles worship so,

don't be such a dick!

cheers

-josh.

[C.Jader]

I listened to the whole thing last night.

 

This is a culturally significant album because it's raising the intellectual property issues surrounding the art of remixing to a national level.

 

And on paper, it looks like a good idea. He's taking a sacred cow "The White Album" and using it as the back drop for a reworking of current significant album.

 

Honestly, I thought the concept was better than the implementation. Most of the disc falls short of the hype it generated.

 

For those of you unfamiliar with the Mashup and want to see how it's really done, look for a copy of Uneasy Listening or Live in LA by DJ-Z-Trip, or anything by Soulwax/2 Many Djs.

 

You can download uneasy listening here:

 

http://www.hurley.nu/Z-Trip/

 

On some of Z-Trip's live sets you can here a well done Jay Z mashup where he layers H to the Izzo over Jane's Addiciton Jane Says. Try the WFNX mix.

[Kaz]

Originally posted by oliveloafe:

"The Grey Album is an art project/experiment that uses the full vocal content of Jay-Z's Black Album recorded over new beats and production made using the Beatles White Album as the sole source material."

 

I'm inclined to believe Danger Mouse's intentions were artistic...

So if you call something an art project/experiment, that makes it okay to steal? Huh. Good to know. Think I'll rob a bank as a little art project/experiment.

 

he only printed up 3000 of em. And, like, since Sony/ATV/Michael Jackson/Paul/John/Whoever owns the Beatles catalouge, it seems like they would be fair game for an artistic project regardless of copyrights.

Seems you would be wrong.

 

actually zzzzzzzzzzz, I'm 22. Why would i want to grow up? Look what happened to Paul! YIKES!

22? You seem 12 at most. Well in 20 years, you'll be a sad pathetic old relic, barely able to press the mouse button on your broken down computer, listening to your old dangermouse mp3s, getting all teary eyed thinking about the olden days, mumbling "In my day, we didn't learn no instruments or write no songs, we did it the right way, taking other peoples hard work, and mashing them together!! These dumb punks today don't know what a good mash-up is. Where is today's dangermouse!?!"

 

And oh, I'm just given the baby boomers some nuts over their all too frequent Beatles worship

Well you can't blame them, because The Beatles make most new artists look like complete retards.

 

don't be such a dick!

cheers

-josh

I thought you were the dick! Cheers dude.

-z

[Salyphus]

Somebody needs to lay off the caffeine, or something

 

Listened to about half the tracks so far. Some interesting stuff there, but it's not 'amazing'. IMO it could have been a lot better if the vocal tracks were stronger. Jay-Z may be one of the better commercial rap artists, but he's still not that great...

 

Still interested to hear the rest. Dangermouse did a good job considering he limited himself to sampling from one album. And those who are up in arms about this 'thievery' obviously have no clue as to what Hip-Hop is all about. I suppose Marcel Duchamp should have been thrown in jail too back in the day....?

[KenElevenShadows]

I'm willing to cut DJ Danger Mouse some slack in the artistic sense since he's limiting his source material to one album. It's pretty good. It's not amazing.

 

It would have been more interesting to get someone from Black-Eyed Peas or someone else to rap on it, as Jay-Z's not my favorite.

 

Interesting conceptually (White Album + Black Album = Grey Album, limitation of source material for the White Album, etc.).

[Steve LeBlanc]

haha...I don't think Danger Mouse thought it would be such a big deal...lots of DJs mash records like this. He doesn't have a problem with The Beatles shutting down the distribution, he expected as much...he does understand copyright law...I just think it's bogus, I think the Beatles should have gone ahead and retroactively given him permission 'cause it's so popular...maybe he does too...whatever.

 

He's not trying to make money off of either Jay Z or the Beatles...just trying to do what he's good at.

[KenElevenShadows]

Yeah, anyone who mashes records knows that legal ramifications of doing so. Most do it for the fun of it, for the art of it, or all of the above + a little mischieviousness...

[gmstudio99]

Originally posted by Ken/Eleven Shadows:

It would have been more interesting to get someone from Black-Eyed Peas or someone else to rap on it, as Jay-Z's not my favorite.

Finally dl'd and listened to it all last night, and I totally agree with this staement. Jay-Z's style is pretty abrasive...I would have much preferred to have heard someone with as silky-smooth delivery like Snoop instead of Jay-Z.

 

I agree with everyone who's said that the concept is better than the execution. The only track that I've found myself repeating is "What More Can I Say."

 

Paul

[Base]

http://www.nme.com/news/107662.htm

 

TWO great legends?!?!? Is this guy seriously implying that jay z is even in the same league as The Beatles?!?

 

And of course it managed enough downloads to qualify for gold status, it's free and has had more hype than star wars now!!!!

[shikawkee]

You know what ticks me off ? I got all these e-mails from my online buddies to download the album. Instead, I found I downloaded bit torrent but not the album. When I went back to get the album it was gone. I'm a sucker.

 

If anyone has it and can share I'd appreciate it.

Thanks.

[comfortat]

I'm an old fogie, and i love the beatles, but there's nothing "sacred" about it. I remember George gettin sued over the He's so fine/My sweet Lord ripoff. What's good for the goose is good for the mouse.

 

I listened to it, it sux. But I hate most rap. It's repetitious and eternally bad. Like disco. I grooved to dance to it, but I ain't pullin out Sat Nite Fever out to jam to.

 

Put in some Cake or Phish or Chris Duarte or Johnny Lang or Gary Hoey or Phil Keaggy and listen to some REAL musicians. What is the appeal of this sampling stuff? I sure don't get it.

 

[Vex]

Hello,

What really baffles me is that this is a MUSIC PLAYER forum! If this was a Tiger Beat forum, I'd expect to see some of these responses!

 

For those of you supporting the right for an individual to use someone else's music without permission, let's turn the tables. What if someone took your best song? Maybe threw a rap over it, cut it up, tried to distribute and sell it? And of course, didn't get permission and had no intention of paying you? I seriously doubt that you would have the same opinion. Bottom line, it is THEFT.

 

Send me your best song, and I'll 'mash it up', maybe put it on a Manure Awareness Council commercial. I'll work 10-12 hours a day for 3 whole days! Oh, you want me to get your permission? And you want compensation? HA!

 

Copyright law exists for a reason. You can't just take someone's intellectual property and have your way with it without permission.

 

Retroactive permission from EMI?!?! The Beatles have made enough money already?!?! It seems to me that those of you with these opinions cannot possibly be songwriters.

 

If Danger Mouse is so innovative and artistic, shouldn't his music/art be able to stand on its own, without blatantly stealing from existing music? Have some respect! It doesn't matter if the music was written by the Beatles or Donovan or Bjork or you!

 

Yes I admit I got pulled into the hype and actually listened to a couple of the 'tracks' from the Grey Album. I shouldn't have bothered. Personally, I think it's a mess, and of course a bastardization. What's so revolutionary about being able to copy and paste in ProTools free?

 

By the way, copyrights endure for 70 years after the last surviving author's death.

 

Thanks for the bandwidth,

Vex

[pumpcat]

It seems that many people on this thread have overlooked the fact that DJ Danger Mouse is not making money from this project. In essence, the reason for copyright laws is to prevent others from profiting from an artist's work without their consent. So unless EMI can prove that DJ Danger Mouse is making money by using The Beatles' music, or causing damages, they really don't have much say. It's not really any different from making a Beatles mix tape and giving it to a friend. Granted, the album has achieved more widespread distribution and publicity than a mix tape would, but that's not DJ Danger Mouse's fault. Once it hit the Internet, it was completely out of his control.

 

The Mona Lisa analogy breaks down on a couple levels. First of all, the remix/mash-up does not damage the integrity of the original work at all. It's not like he has stolen the original masters and sliced them up, effectively ruining them. It's more like making a copy of the painting, drawing a mustache on it, and e-mailing the result to a few friends. (BTW, a copy of the Mona Lisa with a mustache has been displayed in the NY MOMA. Can anybody recall the artist?) Second, the remix/mash-up is not likely to detract from sales of legitimate copies of The Beatles' White Album, like a pirate or bootleg copy would. Just as seeing a picture of the Mona Lisa with a mustache isn't going to prevent anyone from going to The Louvre to see the real thing, people aren't going to forego buying The White Album because they have downloaded a copy of The Grey Album. On the contrary, The Beatles will probably sell more copies of The White Album to rap fans who would not have bought the album before hearing the remix/mash-up.

[pumpcat]

BTW, does anybody here think that The Beatles got permission for the outside recordings that they used in songs like "I am the Walrus" or "Revolution #9". Or was that OK because they were The Beatles and not a Hip-Hop DJ?

[Salyphus]

Why are people asking for the files when they are linked to in the very first post in this thread?

[Kaz]

Originally posted by pumpcat:

BTW, does anybody here think that The Beatles got permission for the outside recordings that they used in songs like "I am the Walrus" or "Revolution #9". Or was that OK because they were The Beatles and not a Hip-Hop DJ?

Not sure if the things they used on those were copywritten, but the Messiah-like Beatles did have to get permission in a number of cases, from the arrangement of what was it, my mind went blank, the big band thing at the end of All You Need Is Love, to the use of all the images on the Sgt. Pepper cover (a couple had to be erased or were not allowed for various reasons, Ghandi, one of the Bowery Boys). Plus other infringements like the Chuck Berry rip-off (hardly) called Come Together (a little too much like You Can't Catch Me).

[oliveloafe]

Originally posted by comfortat:

I'm an old fogie, and i love the beatles, but there's nothing "sacred" about it. I remember George gettin sued over the He's so fine/My sweet Lord ripoff. What's good for the goose is good for the mouse.

 

I listened to it, it sux. But I hate most rap. It's repetitious and eternally bad. Like disco. I grooved to dance to it, but I ain't pullin out Sat Nite Fever out to jam to.

 

Put in some Cake or Phish or Chris Duarte or Johnny Lang or Gary Hoey or Phil Keaggy and listen to some REAL musicians. What is the appeal of this sampling stuff? I sure don't get it.

 

that REAL musician arguement is so very tired, i would like to see you try to do something like this. actually i wouldn't seeing how you're a phish phan.

[Salyphus]

Speaking of Phish, they did a GREAT performance of the entire White Album one year for Halloween.

[DRi]

usa government made amendments to the copyright act because some of elvis' early material was about to become public domain...

 

some of your attitudes on here are naive. the Bootleg scene has existed forever. i have no problems with that, though it was a risky move for Dangermouse to press all that vinyl and sell it.

 

Beatles havent suffered though. god theyve been sampled 1000000000000 times before anyway, even the irrefutable pop-culture classic "Pauls Boutique" album by Beastie Boys (music by The Dust Brothers) samples Beatles and they had eventual clearance.

 

i agree some of you hold beatles as some kind of Dieties... im a fan but couldnt give a shit about their mighty status. its all art. some of you are getting too caught up in the concept of business. i pity that attitude. Beatles lose nothing here.... nothing.

 

sampling has saved the careers of countless artists. Roy Ayers would be living in a cardboard box and not touring the world without sampling.

[comfortat]

gawd that white album rendition was terrible. if ya can't sing, don't try to sing an entire beatles album...

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but mashing has no musical ability inherent in it. Maybe an ear for combining sounds...

 

No thanks, I won't be mashing anything soon. You liking it makes understand why you don't like Phish. Trey is way more innovative in sounds and ideas (his own BTW) than dangermouse will ever be. It's fine by me if ya don't like it, but what have you heard of it?

[KenElevenShadows]

Originally posted by Salonious:

Why are people asking for the files when they are linked to in the very first post in this thread?

They're probably skipping down to the last part of the thread, where the juicy argument starts, so they can figure out whether they support DJ Danger Mouse's mashing endeavors or whether they're down with Phish. Choosing between the two of them, I'll pick something else!

[DJDM]

Regarding the website in the link provided:

 

Does anyone else find this curious?

 

"If Danger Mouse had requested permission and offered to pay royalties, EMI still would have said no and the public would never have been able to enjoy this critically acclaimed work. Artists are being forced to break the law to innovate."

I am not sure how they came to the conclusion that EMI would have said no? And how is it that artists are being "forced" to break the law?

 

As an artist I don't like this concept as it seems to enforce a sort of servitude to media agencies that own the rights to some popular media. As artists we can always say "bite me" to the man and ignore his collections.

 

I guess what I am saying is that as an artist I don't find myself compelled to break the law to create stuff.

 

- DJDM

 

PS As an interesting aside:

 

http://www.justinhampton.com/Grey%20Album.jpg

 

Justin Hampton is the cover artist for the project. Great artist and just by chance an acquaintance of mine. He did the artwork for the Peek-A-Boo Palace show that I wrote tracks and did a mix for.

 

http://www.justinhampton.com/Peekaboo.jpg

 

Which spawned the tracks Peek-A-Boo Palace & Peek-A-Boo Sex Loops .

[Salyphus]

Originally posted by comfortat:

gawd that white album rendition was terrible. if ya can't sing, don't try to sing an entire beatles album...

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but mashing has no musical ability inherent in it. Maybe an ear for combining sounds...

Yes you are wrong on both counts.

What type of correction were you looking for?