Slashdot Mirror
Creative Commons Remix Contest
victors writes "Creative Commons and WIRED recently went public beta with CC Mixter which is a Commons pool for music samples and remixes. The site creates a tree of remix/sources inline with every entry and has Flikr/del.ciou.us style tagging. The launch includes two remix contests and features samples and cuts put in the Commons by Chuck D., Beastie Boys, David Byrne, Danger Mouse and tons more. The winners end up on Chuck D.'s next CD and a CC promo disk and there's already been some pretty astounding entries. Of course every upload is under a CC license that allows legal sampling including contest entries and the big name source tracks and samples. I took over the coding for the site from Lucas Gonze (of WebJay) who did a proof of concept. We're currently working on making the site source part of the CC Tools open source project. That version will support remixing of any media including images, videos and Flash mods."
--Lord FontLeroy
If not, wouldn't that violate the whole non-commercial use part of the CC agreement?
Slashdotted already...? Too bad. :-(
There's a similar bicardi breezer mixer also done in Flash, I personally think it's good as a toy (Flash, that is), not as anything you can seriously use. It's powered by ECMA script, after all.
Nothing costs nothing
I enjoy their music, but how are struggling musicians supposed to make a living with CC? Maybe I don't get it, but these guys can afford to give their stuff away now...I can't.
Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
I can't figure out if I should really be so stoked that the artists on are really 'on the bandwagon' with CC licensing. It seems after a few spins of that disc that it's filled with cast-off and b-side quality material. If they're so hot on it, why no release some of the good stuff under CC?
After 3 beers and 3 espressos, there's a 20-minute period where you can climb anything.
SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
because you are a poser and not a composer.
when you understand the difference then you will learn.
musicians, REAL musicians do not play for money but for enjoyment.
anyone trying to make a living in music is a fool, it's easier to become a rich actor than it is to become a rich musician.
and acting takes no skill.
They have to perform a lot. Many bands that give away their albums on mp3 would like the increase their popularity so that next time they're in town you will go see their concert/performance.
Anyway, doing a couple of CC tracks doesn't mean you can't release a regular full album later that might score increased sales because of the band/group's exposure by the CC tracks.
Sample this!
E.g., MacJams.com
If you really like to do music and you can make a living of it, why not do that?
I agree the number one motivation to be a musician should be to enjoy it, but if it seems people are willing to pay for your music/performance than why not try to make a living with it?
Sample this!
I understand your situation is different if you are making music for a living, but in recent times there has been such a surge of amateur musicians who are technologically-savvy.
...)
Take me for example. I had the unfortunate realisation at age 25 that I was not going to be a rock and roll star, so I switched gears and got a CS degree. But I told myself that I would always make music, but it would have to be in hobby form from now on. Fortunatley with a CS degree I would be able to afford some nice toys for that hobby (at least in theory
Well it worked, and I'm now in the process of recording an album. No, Island records has not flown me to NY for a posh recording session with cameos by Steven Tyler, but I make great sounding music recording the album 100% digitally, with not much $$ invested, thanks to technologies like this (heck, the software was free -- Garageband).
The point is many people like me who always wanted to record in a studio now can -- they can build one that is relatively inexpensive -- and those are the type of people that enjoy tools like this.
I would not be surprised in the future if we see a few people out there who were working professionals who suddenly become famous for musical works they did as a hobby with no intention of making it big in the first place.
-- (Score:i , Imaginary)
Let me be clear---I'm not a musician. But I do not give away the services I perform and we shouldn't expect musicians to do the same. I should've been more clear. Poser? Ummm, OK Asshat.
Don't be a looter...and yes, I know that it's spelled with an "A" instead of an "E".
Hey, take a pledge then:
"I will not use anything that I obtain at no financial cost to myself or where the creator of the thing recieves no financial reward for my use of the thing."
Something along those lines. Feel free.
FreeMusicPush If you want to see more Free Music made, listen to Free
I kind of think of Revolverlution as an open source album. Public Enemy released a few of their tracks on a website, and had a contest for the best remix. The best one got on the CD once it was pressed.
PE has been in the forefront of digital music releases for some time now. Def Jam wouldn't release "Bring the Noise 2000", so PE released it online. Def Jam sued, said they owned all rights to PE music, even though this was all remixes, and didn't want to sell it anyway. In the resultant dust-up, Chuck and Flav split from Def Jam, released the single "Swindler's Lust" for free to show their anger at being owned, and helped in the start of Atomic Pop, what was one of the first Internet focused labels. Atomic Pop released "There's a Poison Going On" (with Swindler's Lust) for $8 download only, $10 pressed, with an autograph from Chuck. They eventually folded, and it was weird seeing "Poison" at Virgin for $18 when I got it for $10. Chuck still has some links from http://www.rapstation.com/ and http://www.bringthenoise.com/ used to be a PE oriented site, now looks like Fark for Hip-Hop news.
Sometimes just getting your track sampled and looped in someone else's can expose your music to other audiences. Besides, if it's not a super hot/top ten track, which you could license for big cha-ching, why not let it go. This seems analogous to letting folks d/l your back catalog for free (or some nominal fee), because you're not expecting to make much money off sales for those albums (you've either already made your money or you haven't - of course there are notable exceptions a la Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon). If you've already made your money (or not and have written those "losses" off), why not give it away, you might gain a new audience, who - if they like your stuff - are far more likely to purchase your next album and see you in concert (where artists actually make their money).
Seems like a great idea to me.
"Content's a bitch."
Flikr/del.ciou.us
I hate it when I slam my head into the keyboard too.
Good heavens Miss Sakamoto - you're beautiful!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It sounds a little bit like a computer fan crossed with some keyboard clicking on a bit of a crashter tip.
Play some live shows.
How about going out and creating new and original music? Taking other people's work and mixing, splicing, etc...just really doesn't seem much like talent to me...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
All of the ccmixter.org links are returning SQL errors--definately a server-side problem. Are there mirrors of these audio files? It would be best if there were Ogg Vorbis copies of these audio tracks elsewhere.
Digital Citizen
I am in a very similar situation. I have pretty much no formal training and I have completed 4 albums at 26... the last one entirely on my laptop. Not to say that I am exceptional, not at all... but simply that music composition has become very affordable and approachable. I'm tempted to say that you no longer even need to be tech-savvy, a good ear and a fair sense of harmony can be enough--things that can be aquired simply by having listened to music all your life, which most of us do.
Now, of course not everyone will pick that up, but the fact that the tools are relatively cheap and easy to use gives the same chance to almost everyone.
The warez scene might also be helping a lot with this--in the same way that it helped 12 year olds master Photoshop, it's now helping young musicians master tools like Reason (I first got a taste of Reason through a cracked 1.0 version, and ended up purchasing Reason 2.0).
Heh. I'd like to see a poll here to find out how many of us actually got started with pirated software. I wouldn't be surprised if it was most of us...
Eh.
So. Do you think anyone will point out that Chuck D. and the Beastie's were the only ones on the previous CC album that chose a license that didn't allow commercial sampling? Think the'd give 'em create here for contibuting stuff to be sampled?
"There is hardly any money interest in art, and music will be there when money is gone."
- Duke Ellington
The idea of being a struggling musician is a bogus way of thinking. The practice of music is not about hustling to become a star. It's about making music constantly, and once in a while making some money on it.
Maybe I'm missing something here. What is the big deal of remixing something?
How about going out and creating new and original music? Taking other people's work and mixing, splicing, etc...just really doesn't seem much like talent to me...
By your logic, every mixing engineer out there is doing something that's "not a big deal" and requires no talent. After all, all they're doing is taking other people's work (the tracks recorded by the band) and mixing, splicing, (and balancing, and arranging, and adding effects, and creating a proper stero image, and creating the proper dynamics, and making sounds "fit" together into a cohesive whole), etc to make a song. That doesn't seem much like talent to you...
Which is, of course, ridiculous. Doing good sound mixing is an incredibly difficult and artistic process. Doing good re-mixing, therefore, can be as well.
BTW: most remixes use only a small number of tracks from the original work (often only the vocal), and are built around completely new compositions to create what's effectively a new song. Would you also claim that in every band and songwriting team, only the vocalist has talent? Because that's where your logic leads.
The following sentence is true. The preceding sentence was false.
to bring your site to a grinding halt.
Well, there are sites out there such as http://www.ind-music.com/ that allow Indie Artists to upload and sell there music. The accounts are free to join. The site does take a commission, but the artists earns more as they sell more songs. I think CC is a great place, but really unless you are an established act, you really don't stand a chance.
I have nothing clever to put here...
Boston's fun, funny, hip, and technologically-aware Jim's Big Ego did this in May 2004. Their song, "Mix Tape," makes some good statements about the RIAA. Several contest entries and the original song and component tracks are available for download.
0 504090919481
http://www.bigego.com/egog/article.php?story=2004
http://creativecommons.org/weblog/entry/4162