Sample (n)- A portion, piece, or segment that is representative of a whole.
The documentary Copyright Criminals examines the creative and commercial value of musical sampling, including the related debates over artistic expression, copyright law, and (of course) money. I recently had the pleasure of viewing this documentary and it really made me start thinking about the current state of design. Continue reading for my full thoughts…
Copyright Criminals tells the story of the early days of Hip-Hop sampling – the process of taking a portion of another artist’s music and using that to create your own music. Is this art? Some people view the process of sampling as theft and believe that it should not be a respected art form. Others give credit to the artists for creating a whole new way of making music. It is possible to argue both sides of the story. In the film, there is an interview with Chuck D of Public Enemy and he is showing his production notes from when they recorded It Takes A Nation Of Millions To Hold Us Back and on one track none of the music is theirs. Every drum, every horn, literally everything but their lyrics is made up of samples.
For the past few years in the shoe industry there has been a huge trend of sampling old designs, primarily from the 80’s. Nike, Reebok, Adidas, New Balance, Converse…many companies have released heritage product. It has been executed in numerous ways, the easiest being a complete reissue of the shoe. Some companies have been taking a “classic” upper and updating it to modern times or putting that classic upper on a new sole unit. The company is showing their roots and paying homage to where they came from.
The company that may be most known for this would be the Jordan Brand. A great example from them is the Spizike, which features different elements of past Air Jordan’s. The Spizike uses the tooling of the Air Jordan III and the upper combines the Air Jordan III, IV, V and VI to create a blend of the early Air Jordan’s. They sampled these classic Air Jordan’s as a means of paying homage to the commercials that Spike Lee directed and starred alongside Michael Jordan as Mars Blackmon.
adidas recently released their TS Supernatural Creator and TS Supernatural Commander, which is a new interpretation of their Feet You Wear concept from the late 1990’s. The way they sampled Feet You Wear was less about aesthetic and more about performance. They saw their Pure Motion Technology as the modern version of Feet You Wear and chose to use their heritage to style it.
There are many directions one can take when designing a product. Some believe in a revolution and others believe in an evolution. I believe design is about growth. It is about learning what has come before you and determining what is coming next. You have to know and understand the rules so you can break them. This can best be described as design sampling. The designer is taking what has already been learned and pushing it forward. This is accomplished by sampling and improving what has been created before.
I have nothing against design sampling or showing heritage; I actually believe it is necessary. If you don’t know where you came from, you don’t know where you are going. My problem is when this sampling becomes oversaturated. When every product shows your “heritage” the story isn’t fresh. What makes a great sample in Hip-Hop is when an artist finds something no one expected and creates a whole new sound with it. The best examples of design sampling create a whole new look and take that category to the next level.
While the design trends over the past decade are not directly related to hip-hop, I still can’t help but think that it is connected because the two cultures influence each other so much. So much of these two cultures are about knowing what came before; being an O.G. Twenty years from now are we going to be looking at this era of design as art or as theft?
B
–
Brett Golliff is a Designer 1 at New Balance
Check out previous “Design Insight With Brett Golliff” posts:
- Allow Me To Introduce Myself…
- Design Insight: Inspected (Inspired) by #23
Really glad this series is back. I read your design posts last week and was impressed. Looking forward to more.
Interesting thoughts! I agree that sampling is a part of the culture and some companies do it better than others. The new Adidas shoe is a great example of how to flip and upgrade heritage in technology form. Great post.
Very nice work. Loving the pictures and examples for the shoes.
I enjoyed reading this topic. Is it a weekly series?
its a good discussion. i think Jordan brand oversteps the line alot and oversaturates on heritage inspirations but its a tough call when the shoes are selling and money is coming in.
I completely agree with your logic. Sampling is necessary even if some do not want to admit it. But you add the caveat that if everything is sampled from the past then your present becomes stale. This I feel is what is hurting JB. They do have good signature lines and new shoes. They are overshadowed by ‘heritage’ themed products however and it makes the rest of the brand look stagnant when they could do so much more.
Thanks very much for making these posts. I like the ideas & discussion happening from this!
I visit this site for stuff like this. Keep it up.
As a designer I think these are really good reflection points to discuss. If you really think it over everything is sampled because everything you learn or take in will be expelled out–even at a subconscious level and that is sampling. So then its more a matter of taste and how you pull it off. Tinker sampled countless inspiration points to create his Air Jordan masterpieces but he did so tactfully and subtly instead of over the head. Thats my main issue with items like the Spizike. Sure kids will buy them but is it damaging to your brand? You can borrow and sample but create something new with it that has substance! I would like to look back on this time in the future and say it was more art than theft but shoes are in a bad state right now with too much focus on the past, IMO.
“When every product shows your “heritage” the story isn’t fresh.”
“The best examples of design sampling create a whole new look and take that category to the next level.”
Agreed!! Great piece!
CBolles-
Great points man!
“…everything is sampled because everything you learn or take in will be expelled out–even at a subconscious level and that is sampling.”
This is something I am constantly thinking about. You never know when inspiration will strike you. It could be at a sporting event, while reading a magazine, or anywhere but it triggers something in you to create. That is what I think Tinker did, he saw other inspiring things and thought about how he can bring that essence into a shoe.
I would also like to clarify that this piece was not meant to criticize the designers at these brands. It is the marketing that is giving them the brief and they (we) do the best to fulfill that brief.
I would say design sampling goes wrong when it becomes strictly about style and not about performance. I actually love the Spizike, the 6 Rings and even the 60+ but they should be lifestyle shoes. The elements on those shoes were created 15+ years ago for a reason, lets update those elements to a current performance standards.
I think the Adidas direction is a good example of this.
B
Great read man!!! I have been thinking like this for years. I wish there were more designs that focused on the DNA of the company’s products and less on the body parts to create more original and EVOLVED products than sampled products. The adidas shoe is a great example of that mindset. I was actually working there in 97 when that shoe was made and to see its evolution is refreshing. Pictures do not do that shoe justice, its fire in real life.
Man that’s the true!
As you stated, there will always be two schools of thought as to what makes for good design, and the correlation to hip-hop helps flesh out the problem. Where does innovation and evolution of a design happen versus when does mimicry for the sake of capitalizing on a successful design happen? To keep on the hip-hop tip, I’ll quote Canibus:
“it’s a common misconception that movement in any direction is labeled as progression”
just because it’s 2010, it doesn’t mean we’re advancing as a people and as designers. To truly design for the future means more than reminding people of the past, but instead, we need to take bold new steps that may not be fully understood at first…like the flightposite 1.
-CO.TM
Great post! I love the Canibus quote.
The more I think about this topic the more I feel that these types of designs can live and breathe in a Lifestyle form, especially if they were more limited. These ideas are cool and fun but shouldn’t be the focal point of the brand or performance.
I think shoes like the Kobe V and the Lebron VII are completely designing for the future. I mean the Kobe V is almost one piece of material and still performs at a maximum level. This shoe definitely takes the category to the next level.
I know a lot of people don’t love it but I think the Jordan 2010 is an excellent step up in aesthetics. It isn’t the best Jordan, but at least it is taking risks and having an opinion.
You mentioned the Flightposite I as not being fully understood, that to me is the 2010. Construction wise that shoe is impressive and hard to match in sneaker factory. While I don’t think it will change the game like the Flightposite I, I do think it will influence risk once again.
I’d prefer to compare the 2010 not to the flightposite, but to one of it’s contemporaries, the AJXV. Both shoes tried to convey characteristics and elements taken from Michael, but both did it too literally and thus, it lost the ‘je ne said quios’ element that made the other jordans so alluring. For example, if you knew Jordan and you knew his nickname, you got the references to a cat in the XIII, it didn’t beat you over the head like a tongue sticking out on the XV or a window to see through things on the 2010.
The flightposite was to shoes what the iPhone is to cell phones. One-piece uppers, hidden/non-existent midsoles and so many more shoe trends came from the styling of the flightposite whereas the Espos had beaten the 2010 to the see-through punch by more than 5 years.
Going back to references to prior designs, I think that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery but we can’t really do much if we keep giving props to the already successful designs. Take the Lebron VII…it’s basically the AJXI with an air max unit and flywire. It’s nice and I would def buy it and the PS edition, but only because it almost looks as good with a suit as the AJXI does, but not because it stands on it’s own strengths. It’s strengths are in the combinations of material and technology, but definitely not in the implementation and application of them.
Thanks again for an awesome read…you should start a topic in the PBF forums to make discussions easier and more convenient because these are definitely stimulating discussions.
I think a PBF discussion would be worth while. I will start this in the future when I up new blog posts.
I think one of the main reasons a design ethos or language is not carried out is because there are too many models. It is easy to do it in cars and electronics because they are all the same (too an extent.) Their performance changes with motor size and computer chips. Nike’s ethos “Quality products inspired by the greatest athletes ever,” it makes sense but it also allows them to change constantly because you can’t say what the best way of building a quality product for the best athletes are.
For instance at NB we have a hard time carrying a core design language, it is getting better now and will be much better in the coming seasons; but when you design like a 1000+ shoes a year it is hard to carry a language through a whole line let alone a category of shoes. I think the reason why it can’t be done sometimes is because of the consumer.
In the end this is a business and it is hard to turn your back on a shoe that is selling or has sold a 500,000+ pairs. Often times you find consumers don’t won’t change, especially with running product. So I guess they are huge part to blame because them saying they don’t want change tells marketing only to make minor changes and rarely revolutionize. This was something I considered bringing up in the initial post.
Is it the consumers fault? I don’t 100% think so, I think they are a huge part but I think its the society and culture we live in. So much of it is borrowed and sampled now days.
Hopefully it changes soon!
You’re right, if people were more open to trying new things, there would definitely be greater strides made in any industry…great point. I am guilty of this myself, being that I do have such a penchant for the XI’s styling, I will buy almost anything with a patent leather toe cap or anything styled like a wing-tip (recently splurged on all the colorwys of the Vans Vault Wing Tip series :/). I think about how people have preferences for certain design elements, which in turn make those popular silhouettes ‘timeless classics’ and wonder to myself how we ever got past the air force 1 or air Jordan 3, and I guess it’s all baby steps, like you said. No one’s going to revolutionize the industry over night, just like no one’s going to make a car that runs on water or cure all the diseases of the world. It’s not that they can’t, it’s just that there’s too much money to be made along the way that it makes more sense to extend the journey to a revolution forever.
The iPhone was the last revolutionary product and look what it’s causing due to the foresight of the technology…mobile carriers are complaining that bandwidth is being consumed at such a large amount that they are considering tiered rates depending on consumption.
Anyway, as always, thanks for sharing and dropping knowledge.
Great insight Bgolliff. Gotta let the oldies be oldies mang, that’s what makes them great. I personally think who-ever is running Jordan brand should be terminated pronto , like I’m serious they’ve been putting out some straight trash lately and been really lazy on new designs. Seriously whoever gave the ok for the Fusions has to be fired. I know at the end of the day a company has to sell products and make profits but at what cost though. I can remember the good old days back in the 90′s when I used to get excited whenever Nike released new kicks, Avia had a few bangers too. real sneakers heads remember the Clyde drexler PE’s. Fila had potential. British Knights and Pony showed some sign of life but only for hot second and Reebook has some great shit. What ever happened to them after Adidas brought them they’ve falling off in the basketball niche market. Nowadays its just Nike , Jordan Brand and Adidas. There’s No variety in the game anymore, no wonder they just put out over-priced crap ass sneakers
On a side note this question is for Dallas Stokes, I’ve heard you no longer with ProtegeMVP. I don’t mean to intrude but what’s the deal with that. What happened and will the brand be deaded after this year. Inquiring minds wants to know
Pony, Avia, BK and Fila were never great brands in terms of sneakers…they were just doing then what you’re complaining about now, they were capitalizing on a niche and cranking out lookalikes of products that were already out.
Fila never cranked out lookalikes back in the days. The Grant Hill Lines wear never bite off of other brands. Maybe Pony and Bk cranked out lookalikes.
B – I just got the word off the street on your blog.
Gotta admit, great dialog, great post. Keep em coming!
I think that there are a lot of people in society that are open and willing to trying new things. Wanting to be the first and begging to be inspired by imagination. This is what separates the leaders from the followers. Unfortunately we don’t see the radical spark from the shoe companies to pull in these inquiring minds.
I agree “at the end of the day a company has to sell products and make profits” but to me these conservative companies producing the same old, year after year lookalikes will always be followers. The company that steps out and generates a new excitement, like it was back in the 90′s is the company that becomes the new, needed leader. Time for someone to change the game.