Your opinions on using loop and sample packs.

[senntenial]

I agree completely. ESPECIALLY if they are melodic loops. You need to figure out those things yourself if you wanna get better.

[R-Y-S-E]

In my opinion, using loops and sample packs is 'cheating'

I agree with you if you use the whole (or most of the) sample, but if you break the sample down (to maybe 1 note of bass), edit this, then repeat multiple times, it's pretty much like playing different notes on a keyboard (if that makes sense).

[-djmk-]

I cannot live without sample packs (I have no way of recording any percussion :[) but i don't like loops. Loops, to me, are kind of lazy. I can understand if somebody uses them to start out, but there's not really any true creative zeal to mixing and matching, instead of going from your heart.

[Foxtrot89]

People put way too much stock into the producer and not enough stock into the music. If a song sounds great, then it doesn't matter who made it or how it was made.

Originality is a huge part of what makes great music, but that's not to say you can't use premade drum loops (or even in some cases melodic loops) and end up with a great song. Daft Punk is an example (though personally I'm not a fan) of loopers who make memorable and successful tracks with looping. Hell, I'm sure all the big names use loops, sometimes unaltered.

[Legion]

Sample packs are inevitable. Even if you have a source for recording sounds (I have a drum kit), you don't always have the set up to record those sounds.

Loops, to me, are perfectly fine, given that you change them. EQing, effects, adding your own samples, all that stuff. But I have much more respect for the producer that avoids using them.

People put way too much stock into the producer and not enough stock into the music. If a song sounds great, then it doesn't matter who made it or how it was made.

This so much. Good music is good music, no matter how it's made. Again, I have much more respect for the producer who is original, and there's valuable experience in creating stuff on your own, but the end result is what matters in my mind.

[Navron]

How to not make music:


I love Cubase, but I really dislike Steinberg's loop fetish. No, I don't need a library of hundreds of pre-made loops. How about a library of one-shot drum samples, to offset the horrible sounding VST based drum patches that require hours of EQ work to even sound slightly decent? Right now the only workaround for Cubase is to slice a sample from a drum loop, export it as its own audio file, and import it into a sample player.

Then I see them coming out with this Sequel crap, and heavily boast things like:
"Create music in minutes...it's just that easy."
"Sequel comes with thousands of loops built-in, covering a wide range of styles."

"Pieces of music, can be assembled using Sequel's extensive library of audio and MIDI loops, without ever pressing a note on a keyboard, or strumming a riff on a guitar."

Quotes from this product video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxjO3obmFR8

Originality is a huge part of what makes great music, but that's not to say you can't use premade drum loops (or even in some cases melodic loops) and end up with a great song.

I kinda see the loop argument being very similar to the, "Photomanipulation isn't art," argument. Both involve the use of taking things you didn't make, and creating something new with it. The overall problem comes from the concepts of creativity and originality.

- If a photomanipulator and a highly skilled artist worked on the same picture, the artist will most likely produce a better picture. Why? Because despite the skill in some very good photomanipulators, even the best photomanipulations have extremely small errors in shading, lighting, etc. A skilled artist can create the scene with all the elements blending well to begin with.

- A new photomanipulator will generally create better pictures than a new artist, simply because art is a very hard profession to get good at.

In a way, loops are like the pictures used in a photomanipulation. They can be thrown together in a half-assed manner, but despite the flaws, it will still generally look/sound better than the complete newbie trying to create it from scratch.

One shot samples are like brush sets. Sure, a photomanipulator didn't create the entire fire effect from scratch, but just using a brush somebody else made doesn't automatically make somebody a better artist. It still requires quite a bit of artistic talent to use it effectively.

A completely original artist and an artist that uses brush sets will be closely matched. In the end, the person with the higher artistic skill/vision will be better than the other.

Most painters don't custom make their own paint brushes.
Most sketchers don't custom make their own pencils.

When it comes down to one shot samples, I see them as the pencils and brushes of music. They don't increase the perception of talent in a musician who uses them. They are simply tools, and just like how a really good paint brush can help a painter make a better looking picture, high quality drum (or stuff like LASS) samples, can help a musician create a better sounding song.

People like music because of the way it makes them feel, but they also like music because it's a talent, and few people rise to become great at that talent, hence why a lot of bands and musicians are worshiped by many.

Many musicians make great music through loops and pieces of other songs, but just like the comparison to photomanipulation, if they were asked to create the same piece, the musician that's 100% original will win out, because there's only so much you can do with non-original material, compared to the original musician who can blend every aspect of their song together with little to no imperfections.

This is way longer than intended, so I'll just close reaffirming what I said in an earlier reply.
"...so in a way, using loops actually hampers a musician's improvement."

[Foxtrot89]

Fun text!

I'm sure I'm not making my point clear enough. Haha! I like your analogy, though I don't agree 100% with it.

My point is that people need to utilize whatever tools they have at their disposal. A great artist will become an even better artist with the more skills they learn. ie: A painter who also sculpts or draws (especially digitally) will only benefit from learning how to photo manipulate. It won't make them worse at their other skills. By learning other techniques and utilizing more tools than the next person won't hinder you, whereas a person who doesn't just toss aside loops because they're loops is just avoiding a particular tool.

An artist who utilizes only loops is guarantee to create less interesting and original songs as an artist who creates their own loops out of one shots and LASS type sample sets, but that doesn't mean the "original" artist wouldn't benefit from not discrediting loops.

Basically, the more tools you utilize, the more useful of an artist you are. If you took two people who knew the same amount about music, only one utilized loops and one shunned them, the one who doesn't discredit them is the better artist as it's just another tool being utilized.

You can do really interesting things with loops. Like drawing, it's near impossible to mimic sounds 100%. If you can find a loop that, whether you leave it alone or chop and rearange, gives you the 100% exact sound you're looking for then why not use it over something you're only 50% or even 90% satisfied with that you created from scratch? Maybe it's just me, but the only reason to settle for something less than 100% satisfaction like that is for bragging rights/not getting poked fun at for using loops. I really do think the final product is the only thing that matters.

Legion said it perfectly when they said "Good music is good music no matter how it's made." They also said it perfectly when they said more respect goes to the artist who is "original." But who's to say they're not one and the same? That's like saying there are zero "original" artists who don't also photo manipulate.

I feel like I'm not making my point well enough. I'll end it by saying that the more tools a person utilizes, the better of an artist they are going to be.

[Conduit]

I personally am strongly against loops. I do my best to avoid anything pre made, such as vst presets or premade drum kits. I even shy away from arpeggiators as I prefer to make them myself. I find using stuff that you didn't create is kinda "cheating". Obviously a lot of people don't share this opinion, since a huge amount of popular songs use presets for the lead. (deadmau5 - ghosts and stuff is an example of this)

However, really have nothing against people who chop up and restructure loops. I don't really understand it, since in my mind its easier just to create the melodies and such yourself, but it's no where near as bad as just sticking in premade loops unedited.

[Navron]

Fun text!

I'm sure I'm not making my point clear enough. Haha! I like your analogy, though I don't agree 100% with it.

My point is that people need to utilize whatever tools they have at their disposal. A great artist will become an even better artist with the more skills they learn. ie: A painter who also sculpts or draws (especially digitally) will only benefit from learning how to photo manipulate. It won't make them worse at their other skills. By learning other techniques and utilizing more tools than the next person won't hinder you, whereas a person who doesn't just toss aside loops because they're loops is just avoiding a particular tool.

An artist who utilizes only loops is guarantee to create less interesting and original songs as an artist who creates their own loops out of one shots and LASS type sample sets, but that doesn't mean the "original" artist wouldn't benefit from not discrediting loops.

Basically, the more tools you utilize, the more useful of an artist you are. If you took two people who knew the same amount about music, only one utilized loops and one shunned them, the one who doesn't discredit them is the better artist as it's just another tool being utilized.

You can do really interesting things with loops. Like drawing, it's near impossible to mimic sounds 100%. If you can find a loop that, whether you leave it alone or chop and rearange, gives you the 100% exact sound you're looking for then why not use it over something you're only 50% or even 90% satisfied with that you created from scratch? Maybe it's just me, but the only reason to settle for something less than 100% satisfaction like that is for bragging rights/not getting poked fun at for using loops. I really do think the final product is the only thing that matters.

Legion said it perfectly when they said "Good music is good music no matter how it's made." They also said it perfectly when they said more respect goes to the artist who is "original." But who's to say they're not one and the same? That's like saying there are zero "original" artists who don't also photo manipulate.

I feel like I'm not making my point well enough. I'll end it by saying that the more tools a person utilizes, the better of an artist they are going to be.

Actually, I don't disagree with you at all.

Perhaps I'm the one that's not being completely clear

I full-heartily agree that the more tools a person has to use, the more creative outlets they have in the end.

What I was trying to say falls more along the lines of, I don't think loops are a good starting point for beginners, because it sort of bypasses a lot of fundamentals of electronic music. For example, I'm sure we can all agree that side-chaining is/was a hard concept to wrap one's head around, but is a very necessary skill for any producer.

For example, Nexus has quite a few side-chained sample loops with a kick drum and pumping lead. With that, I could record a pumping effect without knowing any of the fundamental principles in creating it. If a person wants to create only songs with that kind of effect, it might work out for them, but if not, later on that musician is going to be wondering why their kick is being lost behind their own leads.

So I definitely agree that one could use loops to further enhance their own arsenal, but I don't think it serves as a good starting point for new musicians, who need to learn how to be creative with very limited resources.

You can get good kicks and snares out of Cubase's built-in instruments, but like I said earlier, it takes a lot of work with compression, EQ, and layering, to even come close to something like a Vengeance sample. Could I benefit from purchasing Vengeance samples now? Probably, but if I did that right from the start, I wouldn't have learned the importance of compression, EQ, and layering, which are 3 of many very important fundamental skills that any new electronic musician needs to learn.

[Foxtrot89]

Ah ha! Agreed! That's more than fair to say. Using it as a starting point seems like it would encourage laziness and/or zero progress as a producer.

Bringing up nexus and it's side chainy patches, I really wish there were a way to turn the effect off. So many patches that would sound nicer if you could tweak them just that little bit more. a little off subject, I apologize.

[R-Y-S-E]

Shouldn't using a pack of loops be pretty much like remixing a song from stems, and we all like a good remix, so...

[Overkillius]

Shouldn't using a pack of loops be pretty much like remixing a song from stems, and we all like a good remix, so...

Even though I think that comparison is a bit flawed, I am also against using stems as much as I am loops.

I personally would never consider using them... just because I like to micromanage every aspect about my compositions...

But honestly, if someone can't tell that you are using loops, then that is a good indicator that you used them in a creative enough way.

I am really offput and mad when someone claims "This is my composition!" when you can tell that they just used loops though.

So there isn't anything inherently wrong with pre-made loops, I just often see it as limiting to the composer (which can be considered a good thing actually) and lazy.

Replace "loops" with "stems" and that is essentially how I feel (of course one or two lines don't apply as well). Some people do use stems pretty lazily.

[Captain Ironhelm]

I'm too lazy to even search around to find stems, sometimes easier to just crank out something in the piano roll.

[phantomignition]

I really don't have much of an idea. I don't like using drum loops, but recreating the great sound of them is... pretty difficult, or at least I would think. I've never even considered melodic loops at this point, but as Artimeus said, it's a great way to get into music production. I remember when I used to just take a bunch of loops in GarageBand and throw them together to get something nice.

And then with drum samples I really don't know the alternative to just taking a nice sounding sample and throwing it into a song. I've heard that you should do something with it, I'm just really not sure what. I mean if it sounds good as is, is there a need to change it? I honestly don't know how I'd go about making my own from scratch at all either.