And Then - Day 11
Preview:
This track was made by putting a voice through a granular synthesizer to create large sweeping pads.
File(s):
and_then_revised.wav 21.4 Mb [22 download(s)]User login
and_then_revised.wav 21.4 Mb [22 download(s)] This track was made by putting a voice through a granular synthesizer to create large sweeping pads.
and_then_revised.wav 21.4 Mb [22 download(s)]
Comments
I'm afraid you don't have permission to use voice clips from breaking bad. That makes this derivative of copyrighted content.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
What if I pull the original clip out of the beginning?
You would have to remove all components that used audio clips from Breaking Bad or any other commercially copyrighted source. From what I gather, the entire song is made from such audio clips, recognizable or not.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Well, the sample was processed and resynthesized in a way that makes it entirely distinguishable, in that there are no characteristics of the sound (other than the starting pitch) that could be traced to the original sample. As far as anyone is concerned, as long as the raw and lightly edited audio clips are removed, the pads in this track are sonically original, even if a sample was used in the base.
Distinguishability of the original base content is nearly irrelevant to copyright in this context. That is only helpful in proving if something is a copyright violation. For example, Hank suspected Jesse Pinkman of making illegal substances in the RV, but he couldn't prove it right away. The truth is, Jesse Pinkman absolutely was making meth in the RV. The fact that Hank wasn't able to prove it doesn't change the truth of it.
If any part of this song is using copyrighted material as a base, it is violating copyright. The fact that it is so obfuscated by the various audio tools that Sony Pictures may not be able to prove it is violating their copyright doesn't change the truth of it.I'm sorry. I think this song is catchy, but if ANY part of it was made using copyrighted content, then it can't be hosted here. I do understand the argument "but there is absolutely no recognizable copyrighted parts so what is the difference?". However, the counter-argument is "if there is no difference, then why not make the song without using any of those components?"This is true of any art that uses other people's work as a base, guide, or framework to make your own. If you don't have the other people's permission to use those parts, you have to make your art without those parts.EDIT: Fixed, thanks! :)
Well, so be it then. I have replaced Hank's voice with my own, making 0% of this work derivative of any copyrighted work.