> Erm... you've told me twice about the amen break

Because you believed I wasn't talking about copyrighted samples and yet that break is copyrighted. Hence why I reminded you of that break.

> Did have had plenty of conversations with musicians who called themselves composers, esp. as they would make their living composing tunes for video games and film etc. Sure "producers" is the more common term, but it's a bit reductive for you to say "nobody".

That's because they're a different scene entirely from what we were originally discussing. I didn't say "nobody in music calls themselves composers". I believe the term "producer" originates from "record producer", which film and game composers are not.

> How about Squarepusher, Simon Posford, and folks like that? Guarantee you they have been called all kinds of things, hehe.

From wikipedia:

Squarepusher: Musician record producer DJ

Hallucinogen: DJ, record producer, sound engineer

Yeah I'm sure they have been called other things too but that doesn't mean it is the common vocabulary nor even what they identify themselves as.

As an aside, Squarepusher is one of my all time favourite artists. Seen both live but I have a special love for IDM

> Anyway, when it comes to actually creating original tunes, my experience and recollection tells me it's by far mostly about synthetic instruments and laying out tracks, e.g. actual original compositions.

You keep saying that and I keep saying that it depends on the genre and artist. However that doesn't mean that sampling wasn't a massive part of the scene. I've cited examples to that end too.

> Significantly large samples of copyrighted material play a very small part, in the big picture.

Shall we just overlook the examples I've cited then....

> Of course there's some notable exceptions, but it's a drop in the ocean compared to original material.

That really wasn't the case when I was active in the scene as a DJ and producer. However lets avoid the anecdotes:

From Wikipedia: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(music)#Impact)

"Sampling has influenced all genres of music.[5] It is a particularly important part of pop, hip hop, and electronic music,[14] equivalent to the importance of the guitar in rock.[5] It is a fundamental element of remix culture."

If one compares the sampler to dance music as the guitar of rock, then it's hard to argue that sampling isn't a significant influence on dance music.

Also since you seem to be a fan of Goa, (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goa_trance#Sound)

"A popular element of Goa trance is the use of vocal samples, often from science fiction movies."

However I'm not disputing that synths are also used heavily too.

> Not talking about DJing. By definition that is literally just sampling/remixing.

DJing is not remixing. Some techno DJs will argue otherwise but as one of those multi-turntable techno jocks I found the arguments about DJing being "live remixing" to be overstated. That doesn't mean it isn't still a creative process though.

> And of course you have famous DJ's who put out mixes and nobody knows how hard the original music synthesis freak worked to get that fat bass line sounding just right.

I really don't understand your point here. DJs can't "fatten" up a bassline of an existing track live. They can layer other basslines over an existing track (a trick I'd do regularly) but that's very different to remixing and sampling.

> Re: fair use, I believe you're wrong.

I'm not. To quote Wikipedia again (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sampling_(music)#Legal_and_eth...)

"To legally use a sample, an artist must acquire legal permission from the copyright holder, a potentially lengthy and complex process known as clearance"