# Samplers in music



## Guest (Aug 21, 2015)

I think I may have taken a wrong turn here....
Or maybe I need a reboot on my satnav....

Music using samplers....

I'm struggling...


Please assist.....


----------



## Weston (Jul 11, 2008)

What is wrong with samplers? Why are you struggling?


----------



## SixFootScowl (Oct 17, 2011)

Samplers are a great idea but unless they contain entire works, are limited in usefulness. They break up great works into bits and then you are supposed to enjoy listening to the fragments? They tend to be purchased, given away, and then sit on a shelf or in a bin gathering dust.


----------



## GreenMamba (Oct 14, 2012)

I thought he meant electronic samplers. Those synth devices. I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with them in Classical. All depends on the result.

But we'll never know what the OP meant. Future academics will debate it for centuries.


----------



## Guest (Aug 22, 2015)

To clarify (!) my post was as a result of listening again to the eRikm/Ferrari/Lehn piece Les Protorhythmiques. I struggle to get any personal psychological coherence from it.


----------



## GioCar (Oct 30, 2013)

One of the works I discovered recently and liked immediately is Goebbels' Suite for Sampler and Orchestra. 

If not done yet, I'd strongly recommend to give it a try.


----------



## Guest (Aug 22, 2015)

Ah....Surrogate Cities? Yes, I've listened to some of that before. Quite enjoyed it too.


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2015)

I'd like to know more about what exactly you are struggling with.

Composers have been using prerecorded sounds in compositions for quite a long while. Records at first, of course, but then the perfection of tape recording meant you could record your own sounds to use in your composition. And there are cassettes and CDs, too. Samplers are just more efficient. Easier to work with. Easier than laptops, too, though there are ways of making your laptop behave like a sampler. Laptops are probably the most versatile musical instruments ever.

But philosophically (and hence musically), there's no profound difference between using a couple of turntables to make music and using a sampler to make music. And many people use both.


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2015)

Well...

Maybe I just need to listen to more...and repeatedly...and I shall...

But I think what I mean is the samples sort of stick out like sore thumbs from the rest of the music; it doesn't seem integrated with it. It sounds like adjuncts to the music going on...


----------



## Guest (Aug 23, 2015)

By way of a probably rubbishy comparison, the sampling in Portishead's music seems (in my head!) to be integrated, to be a part of the overall sound creation.


----------



## Guest (Aug 24, 2015)

Ah, OK. That's understandable. I guess I don't hear things as "samples" and "rest of the music," so the sticking out business has never been an issue for me.

That might be because I had been listening to electroacoustic music and then turntable music for many years before I ever heard anyone doing music with samplers, which, to my ears, was just more of the same. 

Or "the same." Obviously, there are differences. Any machine* will imprint it's particular personality onto the music. The human just has to be stronger, that's all!!

*meaning whatever you're using to make sounds. A trumpet is a machine. A CD player is a machine. A piano is a machine. And so on....


----------



## Guest (Aug 24, 2015)

some guy said:


> Ah, OK. That's understandable. I guess I don't hear things as "samples" and "rest of the music," so the sticking out business has never been an issue for me.
> 
> That might be because I had been listening to electroacoustic music and then turntable music for many years before I ever heard anyone doing music with samplers, which, to my ears, was just more of the same.
> 
> ...


Thanks. Yes, this is my suspician: that I need more exposure for the melding into one musical experience.


----------

