Girl Talk
Girl Talk is a DJ that combines a wide range of songs together in a style called mash-up. When I read about the combinations of flavors, such as Jay-Z rapping over a Radiohead track, it sounded interesting. He offers his latest CD online for whatever price you offer. Imagine for yourself what I paid to see what it sounded like.
The "tracks" actually run together in a continuous album that hardly has a semblance of "song" in it. Rather, the entire monstrosity is set to a drum beat with many the samples of lyrics and instrumentals dubbed in, sped up or slowed down to match the rhythm. Some mixes are intriguing, but none last long enough so nothings is worth a repeat listening. The effect feels like the radio got drunk and decided to play bits pop radio hits from the past 30 years and bits of a hip hop mix tape. There are no lyrics really, just borrowed hooks, calls, and blips familiar from popular songs. I am sure the mess is popular among young people wanting to dance (evidenced by his October concert in Chapel Hill at the Cat's Cradle selling out a couple of months in advance of the show). I prefer to listen to different music...
What is fascinating, however, is this sampling is entirely free. Girl Talk pays no royalties. Apparently the claim is that the snippets used all run less than 30 seconds so they skirt the laws governing the copyrights normally applied for song sampling. This partially explained why the songs all sounded like a lawnmower ran over a CD collection. I read that he would required 600 approvals for all the copyrighted material used. Assuming those parties filed a class-action lawsuit, the cost-benefit analysis is probably not worth the return to the individual parties. If Girl Talk earned $1.2 million and all 600 parties successfully won back all revenue that dwindles down to $2k per party (talk about diminishing returns). If Girl Talk's method are profitable, I would fight to retain the marketability of my song rather than allow it to be diluted and replicated on the market without royalties paid. Surely other artists will follow in the wake of whatever actions happen to Girl Talk.
The "tracks" actually run together in a continuous album that hardly has a semblance of "song" in it. Rather, the entire monstrosity is set to a drum beat with many the samples of lyrics and instrumentals dubbed in, sped up or slowed down to match the rhythm. Some mixes are intriguing, but none last long enough so nothings is worth a repeat listening. The effect feels like the radio got drunk and decided to play bits pop radio hits from the past 30 years and bits of a hip hop mix tape. There are no lyrics really, just borrowed hooks, calls, and blips familiar from popular songs. I am sure the mess is popular among young people wanting to dance (evidenced by his October concert in Chapel Hill at the Cat's Cradle selling out a couple of months in advance of the show). I prefer to listen to different music...
What is fascinating, however, is this sampling is entirely free. Girl Talk pays no royalties. Apparently the claim is that the snippets used all run less than 30 seconds so they skirt the laws governing the copyrights normally applied for song sampling. This partially explained why the songs all sounded like a lawnmower ran over a CD collection. I read that he would required 600 approvals for all the copyrighted material used. Assuming those parties filed a class-action lawsuit, the cost-benefit analysis is probably not worth the return to the individual parties. If Girl Talk earned $1.2 million and all 600 parties successfully won back all revenue that dwindles down to $2k per party (talk about diminishing returns). If Girl Talk's method are profitable, I would fight to retain the marketability of my song rather than allow it to be diluted and replicated on the market without royalties paid. Surely other artists will follow in the wake of whatever actions happen to Girl Talk.
respond or e-mail this post:
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home