The art of sampling, put simply, is taking a couple seconds out of an already released music track and looping it behind a new track. To do this, you send an audio signal to your computer and the computer ‘samples’ it- basically takes a lot of very quick pictures of this sound and then saves it accordingly. The theory that makes it possible (sampling theorem) was developed by Bell Labs (surprise, surprise) and it became such a popular technique that all digital music is made by a form of sampling. The most popular music creating services, such as GarageBand, use loops and samples to populate the options a user is given. Attached is a Ted talk by one of the top producers of the last decade (he’s produced for Amy Winehouse, Bruno Mars, etc) in which he discusses the art of sampling. He explains his point of view that sampling isn’t about ‘hijacking nostalgia wholesale” as critics often claim, but actually about including yourself in the narrative of a song while moving that story into the future. In other words, it’s a way of acknowledging the past and its influence, but advancing the narrative with modern ideas and technology.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3TF-hl7zKc

Continue reading →

In every country, there are social traditions that provide societal glue. Common among these is folk music, which not only brings countrymen together, but also served as a political tool to help form an identity as a country. Think about what America would be without its long history of racism, folk tunes, and eventually country music. It has changed and influenced the cultural landscape for over a hundred years and helped provide the political climate we find ourselves in today. Having a particular kind of music belonging to your country helps those that listen to it feel stronger and a more cohesive group. It solidifies their way of life as legitimate, and nowadays it even confirms for a lot of people that their way of life is the best way of life and everyone else across the globe lives in an inferior manor. The Internet has only expanded upon this, bringing together the racist from Arkansas with the racist in Arizona. Without this music to bong all the rural folk together, how would they have developed so much convert (and recently not so covert) racism against anyone that doesn’t fit into their 3:30 second ideal view of society.

Reggae originally came from Jamaica in the late ’60s. While Americans often use the term to describe the sound of all Jamaican dance music, the term actually describes a specific kind of sub-genre that was heavily influenced by not only the ska and rocksteady movements of 1960s Jamaica, but also traditional calypso and African music as well as American R&B and jazz. Another major influence was the Rastafarian movement, with many important fasts drummers playing on reggae records. Perhaps the most identifiable characteristic is its offbeat rhythems. The chords are staccato and played by a guitar or piano on the offbeats of the measure. In 1968 the first real reggae records were released, and almost instantaneously its influence spread across the globe. Before the year was over Johnny Nash had already introduced a bastard form on reggae to American radio. To this day, reggae has an influence on American radio, most recently from the radio smash ‘rude’.

While music is not political inherently, all modern music at least seems to be drenched in all sorts of politics. Whether it be class politics, race politics,  or ownership politics, every song we hear is influenced by these factors.

These politics are amplified when we begin to talk about appropriation. Where is the line between being a parodist and a thief? For example, Elvis picked the parts he liked from folksy and country music, whirled them all together in a blender, and then even directly imitated the vocal styles of American American singers. Even the media’s white-washed version of history accepts this fact, as shown by the movie Forrest Gump. After watching Forrest ‘dance’ one time, the character of Elvis knew he could make money off of moving his hips that way. While that may not be entirely historically accurate, it shows what kind of a man he was.

“Did you know Al Gore created the internet?” My roommate asked me, completely seriously. The only reaction my brain would compute was to laugh nervously. I don’t know where he had gotten this far-fetched idea, but it shows how little our schools are teaching about the creation of the greatest invention of the 20th century.

I explained to him that it was not one man or woman who created the internet, but more likely dozens of people working together extensively for years. It was originally funded by the Department of Defence and was called ARPANET, a near internet like hybrid that used packet switching to allow multiple computers to communicate on a single network. A couple key players such as Robert Kahn (data transmission) and Tim Berners-Lee (who invented the World Wide Web)came in and made adjustments and by the 90’s, the internet was much more recognizable a place.

I remember as a kid, I had an older sister who (like most little girls) liked to play with barbies. I’ve always wanted to be included in everything I see, so I was very confused when my parents told me I wasn’t allowed to play with her toys, instead I had to play with some dumb ugly truck. I didn’t understand why, and the only reason I got was “Boys play with cars, girls play with dolls.” That’s it. No explanation. Just black and white boundaries that cannot be crossed. While I’m not trans and love being a guy, I was peeved that I couldn’t play with dolls. So my 7 year old self told my parents I wanted to be a ‘builder’ and therefore needed legos to play with. Little did they know, those little lego characters were having tea parties up in my room.

It wouldn’t be for many years later that I would understand why my parents had reacted that way. Put simply, the act of thinking is the act of placing boundaries and restrictions on certain things in order to identify them. So what happens when someone or something crosses those boundaries? We get that weird, uncomfortable, shift in your seat feeling. Our brain is confused, so we must think purely with our emotions, causing us to either love or hate this object or person. Think about the way racially-mixed children used to be treated. Since people saw black and white as boundaries that could not be crossed, someone inhabiting characteristics of both groups was shunned by society. While we’ve come a long way since then, we still have a ways to go. Why do people find it uncomfortable for them to see a perfectly healthy trans person (a la Caitlyn Jenner)? It transgresses gender boundaries we’ve been taught since birth.

However, boundary transgressing people are not always targets for hate. Jesus himself transgressed the boundaries between human and divine, and was loved for it. People who transgress boundaries push us to the limits of our thinking and make us question the way we were viewing the world. Since we don’t have a mental frame for thinking about them, we’re in uncharted territory. Because of this, boundary transgressors are often huge pop figures. Think of Michael Jackson and Lady Gaga. Two of the biggest pop stars of all time are both major boundary transgressors. Michael went from being black to white, and gaga breaks down boundaries before she even gets out of bed in the morning. She represents the bridge between monster and human, man and woman, fantasy and reality. This is a huge part of the reason everyone was so transfixed with her when she first broke. Nobody knew what or how to think of her, so she became a superstar. (The classical training and unbridled talent didn’t hurt either.) In the first two years of her career, there were massive rumors swirling claiming she was a hermaphrodite. While there was no truth or evidence to this claim, the rumor stuck and became a major conversation piece for middle America, as well as the world. Why was everyone obsessed with a pop star’s crotch? Because it was an easy way to explain why she is such a boundary crosser. Since our mind’s couldn’t comprehend why she was doing all this, we found the easiest solution. However, she doesn’t have a penis, she didn’t used to be a guy. She’s just a boundary transgressing human, just like Michael, and just like Jesus. 

Below I’ve included a link to an article about the impact of reverb. It was an interesting read, and seemed to be in line with what we talked about in class this week. Today, reverb is used to some extent on every song that plays on the radio. It helps make weaker voices stronger, and can add a specific feeling to the music. One of the criticisms of modern music is that its lack of dynamics cause it to be static and same-sounding. However, reverb can help diversify it. With the advancement of computers, reverb has taken on a whole new life, with new technology being able to make it seem like the track was recorded in an area with a specific acoustic setting. For example, for a punk rock band reverb can help it seem like it was recorded in a garage even if it was recorded in a state of the art recording studio. On the opposite end of the spectrum, it can add a cathedral-like hauntedness to more atmospheric pop tracks. Reverb can add personality and flavor to a track in a different way that differing dynamic levels used to, but its a modern solution that allows the loudness wars to continue .

http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2012/06/how-humans-conquered-echo/258557/

As the world neared the 20th century, new inventions were changing the way Americans travelled, communicated, and entertained each other. The invention and expansion of the railroad allowed people to travel long distances in a much decreased time, while the telegraph made it easier to communicate with those far away. Before, in both traveling and communication, there had to be much foresight involved, as it would often take weeks for a person or letter to arrive where it needed to. Therefore, these things happened much less often. People stayed relatively close to where they lived, and only communicated with those far away sparingly. However, once these new inventions spread their way into American life, people started thinking and living differently. Time and distance were not so important as they once were, as they could be transcended by technology. However, not everyone liked these societal changes. Below I’ve included a link of a post describing the ‘benefits and evils’ of the telegraph, in which it states that by getting the news immediately, it is often not as accurate. What I found amusing is that I’ve read many modern-day articles saying the same type of things about the convergence of social media and mass media. This goes to show that where there is innovation, there is always those condemning it.

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/07/in-1858-people-said-the-telegraph-was-too-fast-for-the-truth/375171/

WW2 helped pull America out of the Great Depression by increasing labor needs exponentially, especially in manufacturing. When the war was over, the government didn’t want to erase all the jobs it had created, as well as wanting to keep the Soviet Union in check, so it permanized the military and created the military industrial complex. Continually pouring money into science research and military developments had many positive benefits such as a national highway system, the development of the transitor, and the creation of the mp3 audio format. However, this was also setting up America to fail. The Soviets weren’t able to keep competing with us and the Soviet Union ended up bankrupt and split up. However, once the Soviet Block was dissolved, we still continued to build-up our military. Was the fall of the Soviets not warning enough that something similar would soon happen to us? This great excess in spending, while resulting in many scientific innovations, also began to land our country in more and more debt. One has to wonder if our Congress would still be arguing ineffectively every few months about having to raise the debt ceiling if the military industrial complex was dissolved after the Soviet Union fell. Many would claim we needed our huge standing military in order to conduct the ‘War on Terror’ several years later, but if we hadn’t already been so prepared to go to war, would that have happened in the first place? It is widely accepted now that we rushed into wars in the middle east because of the emotional outrage over 9/11 and faulty information provided by the Bush administration, but if we instead had needed months and months to prepare for war, we may have been able to stop it and therefore save millions of lives that didn’t need to wasted.