Criticizing Musicians for Using Splice Samples is Some Classist Bullshit
Something Afrojack said in a recent interview with the podcast XLNTSOUND shocked me. Around the 23-minute mark, the Dutch DJ and producer criticized Fred Again.. for his use of Splice samples in the track ten. "It's based off three Splice samples," said Afrojack. "To me, that was disappointing when I found out. 'Oh my God, that's four Splice sample loops on top of each other! I love Fred Again.., and he's super talented, but when I found out that was a sample, I was like..." Of course, I wouldn’t care about the comment if it didn’t touch on one of my personal insecurities. As a musician, I gotta admit I’ve been relying more and more on Splice loops in my own production, and in this post, I’ll tell you why.
Splice of the Pie
Like most beatmakers, for me, Splice loops have replaced the old-school way of sampling. Because the laws surrounding sampling are as archaic as they are unforgiving, Splice royalty-free loops and one-shots are a must for any sample-based genres.
Sure, digging through the platform’s sample packs will never replace the elation of going through old scratchy vinyl to find that one magic snippet that will change your life… But it’s a valid substitute.
The truth is, Splice’s catalog is pretty impressive. Whatever sub-genre you’re making, you’ll probably find what you need on there. The sounds are well-labeled with a key and a tempo, so all you have to do is drop them in your DAW, and you’re good to go. And that, in itself, is the problem…
Sometimes, Splice feels suspiciously easy. It’s almost like cheating.
That Me Espresso
Earlier this year, many videos about Sabrina Carpenter’s summer hit Espresso made the rounds on TikTok. Different content creators pointed out that the pop track was made mostly using samples from a popular Oliver pack available on… You guessed it, Splice.
Says Afrojack: “When I saw that I was like, so a guy took the beat that you produced, and then he looped it and played bass on it, and now it's his publishing, his intellectual copyright… I’m like, whoa - all due respect to the guy, no disrespect, he used samples and the guy made it a sample - but you made a composition. The composition is the talent. The people appreciate the melody and the composition, they don't appreciate the guy that put four samples on top of each other!"
In this case, it’s true that that specific use of Splice gives that same jolt of disillusionment as an Olympic athlete who gets caught in a doping scandal. And it just seems plain wrong that Oliver doesn’t get any credit, officially.
It doesn’t feel too cool.
The Discreet Charm of Sampling Vinyls
The thing is, a lot of tracks you admire are the result of heavy sampling. Artists that have profoundly shaped me as an artist—anyone from Daft Punk to Kanye—have used chunks of old tracks to make something new, or at least something that felt new. Artists like these have been both unapologetic and incredibly creative through their use of sampling.
And I guess here would be my place to give you a big speech about the fact that what matters is the result and not the process. I could also go into modern art, the various practices of reappropriation, Warhol’s soup cans, blablabla…
My honest opinion is that music is all about how it makes you feel, and the way that music was made definitely influences how you feel about it, once all is said and done.
That might be why people like me, who romanticize the 90s, might be totally cool with a bohemian DJ sampling a hissy vinyl he found in a bargain bin, while totally cringing at the idea of someone going on the Internet, downloading pre-fab samples on a website, and making a commercial single out of it.
What’s a Producer, really?
How you see the Splice debate might depend on how you interpret the word “producer,” though.
In the music world, these days, the word “producer” is synonymous with “composer,” and sometimes even with the word “artist.” The modern music producer is the film director of the music world.
But in other industries, the producer is the one that makes the work of art happen. They lead the teams, they rally the talent, they make the dream come true. In that sense, the music producer could just be the person who makes sure a track that would have never seen the light of day becomes a reality.
In that sense, the team behind Carpenter’s tune doesn’t really care how it was made, as long as they don’t risk getting sued for it.
Is that a callous attitude? Uh… Well yeah. Is that type of mentality in part responsible for the fact that a lot of mainstream art made these days is bland and feels AI-generated? You bet.
But if you went to a club this summer and saw people dancing the night away to Espresso, you might just want to get over yourself for a minute and appreciate that what most people expect from music is to dance and have fun.
Sampling is for Rich People
As a professional beatmaker, I would like nothing more than to have the option to grab from all the great albums from the history of music. But the problem is that the laws aren’t evolving fast enough to allow that. Sampling is still considered a crime, and it can land you in a bunch of legal trouble.
If you’re a billionaire, someone like Jay-Z, for example, you might be able to buy your way out of it, but for small creators, the damages could be enough to land you on the street. In a way, sampling has become the last great luxury for artists. If you’re going to use ideas from the past to create something new, you better have the bank account to back it up.
Nevermind that using ideas from the past to create something new is how all great things were created in the first place…
Even the concept that “real” musicians should learn how to play every instrument, or hire session musicians who can, is quite inconvenient for those of us who might not have the liberty—and the budget—to do so.
A lot of young beatmakers turn to sampling because they didn’t have the pleasure of having music lessons. Or the leisure to practice for hours on end when they were kids.
A producer like Afrojack might have had that privilege, and he’s definitely entitled to reap the rewards of the work he put into it, but blaming artists for using affordable loops is some classist bullshit.
Something Like A Manifesto
I recently stumbled upon the documentary RiP! A Remix Manifesto while going down a YouTube rabbit hole. In it, the director Brett Gaylor explores the complexities of the laws surrounding sampling by following the mixtape auteur Girl Talk.
Despite being made nearly 20 years ago, the movie remains incredibly relevant in 2024. I remember watching it back then, I was diving into music production, and I didn’t give much thought to sampling because it didn’t feel accessible.
RiP! cracked my head wide open.
Rewatching RiP! A Remix Manifesto reminded me of just how deep the roots of remix culture go—and how unfair it is to criticize artists for using modern tools like Splice. The film dives into the clash between the freedom to remix and the stranglehold of copyright law. In a sense, services like Splice were born out of necessity because lawmakers and lobbyists don’t care about what’s good for the artists.
Just as RiP! argues that all art is built on the ideas of others, using Splice loops is simply another way of reinterpreting existing material to create something new. It’s the same creative process that gave us masterpieces from someone like Girl Talk, who took chunks of older tracks and turned them into party anthems, even if it got him into legal trouble.
The democratization of creativity, which the film celebrates, is exactly what Splice offers to modern producers. It levels the playing field, allowing anyone with a laptop to create high-quality music without needing to spend thousands of dollars on music lessons and expensive gear. The film argues that creativity thrives when the tools are accessible to everyone, and that’s what Splice does—it gives us the freedom to experiment without worrying about getting slapped with a lawsuit.
The ethics of sampling, whether it’s from an old vinyl record or a Splice pack, aren’t as clear-cut as some might think. The boundary between what’s ‘original’ and what’s ‘borrowed’ has always been blurry, and RiP! makes a strong case that this blurred line is where true creativity happens.
If Afrojack or anyone else wants to criticize using Splice loops, maybe they should take a page from RiP! A Remix Manifesto and recognize that building on what already is how a lot of great art was made.
Creativity: 1, Afrojack: 0
In the end, I think the debate is moot. Creativity, and whatever pushes it, will always win.
Whether it’s Splice sample packs or AI, what matters in the end is how we use it. Cool people will always create more cool things and advance the culture further.
I think Splice has already made things better for producers, and if you’re a musician, you don’t have to use it, but it’s good to know it’s there.
There are times when I’ve made beats and felt guilty for relying too much on a couple of loops. But then I’ve heard the same loops in other tracks on Spotify and realized there are countless ways to spice up a musical idea. Working with more samples has changed the way I think about music, and it has often streamlined my workflow. I’ve made great songs with loops, and I’ve made a lot of terrible ones as well.
Ironically, because I’ve worked with Splice loop, I’ve become a much better musician.
Using Splice loops is that it gives me the impression of jamming with super-talented producers from around the world. Sometimes I’ll just put a sample on loop and noodle over it with a synth or a guitar. It’s not the same as jamming with actual human beings—it will never replace that—but it is the next best thing.
And, believe it or not, I still make beats from scratch from time to time. No Splice samples or nothing.
All products featured in this post are independently selected by myself. However, when you buy something through my retail links, I may earn an affiliate commission.