If you mean the sound quality, Protracker uses mono, 8 bit 11Khz samples....expect "crunchiness."
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What have you done with a PowerPC today?
- Thread starter 2984839
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I do!
We used to have a few of those floppies for the C64 when I was growing up, along with the white-and-blue Verbatim brand.
EDIT to add: When I started finding software on BBSes, I used to use a paper hole puncher to cut in a write notch for the reverse side on the single-sided-rated diskettes we already had. I’m sure everyone did that manoeuvre back then, despite the general warning that, putatively, doing that would harm the diskette. That never happened with us, but we also had maybe a few dozen disks, at most.
Last edited:
It's called copyright
@Dronecatcher - if you're charging for your tracks, I hope you have all your samples cleared with Errol Brown, Jeff Wayne and all the others. The crazy days of 'Pump up the volume' and 'S'Express' are long gone.
Music Sampling Rights: What You Need to Know - Romano Law
Like many forms of art or expression, music is protected by copyright law. What Rights Do You Need to License for Music Sampling?
www.romanolaw.com
De Minimis Copyright Infringement in Music
In the context of musical copyright infringement, the legal doctrine of “de minimis infringement” involves using parts of a song in such a small amount that it does not constitute a significant legal violation. The doctrine pos...
I’ve been around long enough to know to never say never. =)
It's called copyright
That's called being patronising.
What you completely ignored in your haste to act superior was the critique of ITV - a UK broadcaster and media organisation barring people who live in the UK from viewing content from a UK TV series that is best known for being aired on UK TV but allowing that video to be viewed by people who live outside of the UK.
As was observed in a reply to my post...
Thanks
I know - and yet you can find whole episodes of Space 1999 on there!
Anyway, you enjoy your day. I'll certainly enjoy mine.
I am not but on Bandcamp any interested party can pay what they want - if the copyright holders come knocking, I'll be happy to hand over the proceeds of my work, which after 14 years amounts to £2.30
The vast majority of my work is original material - this was an exercise in old skool sampling.
Also, my whole point isn't to pass off other people's music as my own but to make my own statement by forcing disparate source together. This is a celebration of music that I love - clearly it doesn't remotely connect to you. That's fine.
Last edited:
May I just offer the hot take that Ben Liebrand is woefully overrated as a producer?
His only decent, (relatively) novel work was the 1989 album, Styles. “Move to the Big Band” was a highlight of that album, though the second half was chock-full of filler tracks.
Last edited:
Honestly, I don't give a rat's potatoe for whether he, as a producer, is rated, overrated or x-rated.
His remixes either work or they don't. This one worked. I have two copies. Guess why..
Last edited:
So presumably you're partial to remixes of The Singing Malteser and find mine crude and sub-standard (hence your original comment) - no need to be cryptic when being criticalCareful there
I have two copies. Guess why..
Because you scratched the first one trying your hand at being a DJ and you thought “scratching” meant dragging the stylus laterally across the grooves. 😜
Thanks for all the info! I'm not sure if it's worth trying to get it connected.
That reminds me of one of the few, truly entertaining moments in Rocky V...
Most copyright owners, performers and their
When I became interested in sampling, someone from Steinberg who demoed ReCycle for me (and urged my unemployed self to buy a PowerMac to run it), explained that you can get away with having uncleared stuff played on the radio and in the clubs on the basis that it's not a commercial release and thus the goal is artist promotion.
As an aside, one of my family members put together a remix for a well known UK artist and soon after its release, he received a phone call from a record company exec accusing him of copyright infringement by using an uncleared sample on the track. He then clarified the situation during a conference call involving himself, the exec, a musicologist and a legal shark where he went into his studio and talked them through the entire production process of the remix and demonstrated how he'd played the melody on his keyboards - allowing the trio to hear everything.
The musicologist stated to the others that there was no case to answer and the matter came to a close. Though I imagine that the other two must've been annoyed at being denied their cut of a windfall.
That reminds me of one of the few, truly entertaining moments in Rocky V...
Most copyright owners, performers and theirleechesrepresentatives are far more interested in targeting hit albums/singles with silver, gold, platinum etc certification because there's guaranteed to be a payday, rather than people who are flying under the radar and just doing stuff for the fun of it. Hence the expression "where there's a hit, there's a writ."
When I became interested in sampling, someone from Steinberg who demoed ReCycle for me (and urged my unemployed self to buy a PowerMac to run it), explained that you can get away with having uncleared stuff played on the radio and in the clubs on the basis that it's not a commercial release and thus the goal is artist promotion.
As an aside, one of my family members put together a remix for a well known UK artist and soon after its release, he received a phone call from a record company exec accusing him of copyright infringement by using an uncleared sample on the track. He then clarified the situation during a conference call involving himself, the exec, a musicologist and a legal shark where he went into his studio and talked them through the entire production process of the remix and demonstrated how he'd played the melody on his keyboards - allowing the trio to hear everything.
The musicologist stated to the others that there was no case to answer and the matter came to a close. Though I imagine that the other two must've been annoyed at being denied their cut of a windfall.
This is why I’m on Team Sunset Copyright on Everything in Fifteen Years or Less, Just Like a Patent on Medicine, but I found this didn’t fit on a shirt very well.
ITV probably doesn't hold the copyright in the regions where the video is playable, so it would be up to the holders in the other regions to go after YouTube if they chose to.That's called being patronising.
What you completely ignored in your haste to act superior was the critique of ITV - a UK broadcaster and media organisation barring people who live in the UK from viewing content from a UK TV series that is best known for being aired on UK TV but allowing that video to be viewed by people who live outside of the UK.
As was observed in a reply to my post...
Youtube's policy makes no sense - there are hundreds of Space 1999 videos on there. I myself made a fan trailer of the Dragon's Domain episode last year which was published without issue.
ITC Entertainment Group, the company that made Space: 1999 (and many other fantastic stuff!) and the majority of its back catalogue, including Space: 1999, is a wholly-owned subsidiary undertaking of ITV. See pages 255-256 of the 2022 annual report.
I'm not arguing about that. But the rights to the series has been sold to other broadcasters abroad, and in those regions they would be the ones to file claims of unlicensed use to a platform like YouTube. Even if that's not the case, ITV would have to register the copyright in other regions for their IP to be protected there. These laws aren't really made with the internet in mind where there are no borders and anyone can "broadcast" content.
The algorithm seems to be better at picking up audio infractions than copyrighted video. I have some digitized home movies that I share with family members as unlisted YouTube videos. More often than not there's music playing somewhere in the background and even when it's nearly inaudible I get a content match and need to edit out part of the sound before I can upload a clip.
Licensing rights are not the same as copyright ownership.
A licensee cannot file a copyright claim on YouTube - that is in the domain of the copyright owner or a legal representative.
It's extremely unlikely that a media organisation like ITV wouldn't have ensured that their IPs are protected globally. As was pointed out earlier, this is a case of an inconsistent enforcement.
Anyway, I'll leave it there because we've strayed way off-topic and I've had some posts deleted recently for doing so on the grounds that expressing a difference of opinion constituted "bickering." I shall refrain from expressing my opinion on that...
This is why many YouTubers of late have resorted to circumventing this when referencing clips from copyrighted material in their videos by noticeably pitching the audio either up or down to evade a claim/strike.