Talk:Interpolation (popular music)

"Interpolation can also refer to when an..." this is awkwardly grammared. Let's clean this sucker up.

Citations are needed both on the claim that "interpolation" is used to refer to musical borrowing of this kind and the specific borrowings described. Thanks. Hyacinth (talk) 06:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't question whether square dance callers use patter, I question whether that is considered interpolation. Hyacinth (talk) 19:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

• In the broader sense of interpolation as something inserted into a performance that breaks into a phrase, I would say yes. Here's JESSIE SALISBURY of the Nashua Telegraph on "Trying to learn the basics of square dancing", in News and Classifieds from Southern New Hampshire :
  • "In most groups, there was one outgoing, life-of-the-party-type person who memorized the figures and became the prompter, or later 'the figure caller.' He acquired a list of colorful sayings, or 'patter,' that he could insert among the cues to add to the fun."

• My idea in this article was to show several of the many ways in which artists interpolate new material into existing music or texts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fbarw (talk • contribs) 21:02, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

I would caution you to check Wikipedia:No original research first. Hyacinth (talk) 02:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I think Contrafact may be more what you're looking for. Hyacinth (talk) 10:15, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

In a process analogous to its use in music, a literary work could be enlarged, amplified or expanded by interpolation, often of witty material or quotations; this was called farcing (from Latin farcire, to stuff). In the commedia dell' arte, an interpolated comic episode usually involving a practical joke was called a burla (Italian for joke), while a piece of interpolated comic business or dialogue was a lazzo (from Latin laqueus, noose or snare). A gag originally meant an interpolation by an actor in his lines of an amusing local or topical allusion, or bit of byplay.

Interpolation can also occur at the level of individual words or lines. Thus, in classical prosody, lengthening by an interpolated syllable was designated diectasis (from Greek diekteinein, to stretch out), while a short colon or rhythmic series called a mesymnion (from Greek mesos, middle, and hymnos, hymn) could be interpolated in a stanza. The interpolation of meaningless sounds or words into speech is called embololalia (From Greek embolos, something thrown in, and lalia, speaking).

I removed the above (references) since it is not about music. Hyacinth (talk) 01:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't have a copy of this book to cite from, but I remember that he used "interpolation" in a specific melodic sense to mean inserting as little material as one note into an existing melody, rather than inserting a whole new phrase within an existing phrase. If someone else has a copy, will you add this additional meaning to the article and cite an example from the book? Another Stickler (talk) 11:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Anybody else find the idea that interpolation now means "cover version" in popular music a bit dubious? All the citations are album reviews, and most of them cite a quote from the producer of Wu-Tang Clan that sounds like a probable misuse of the word... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.20.66.27 (talk) 03:26, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

I find INTERPOLATION used often in forum discussions when the intent is clearly to interpret or to transcribe. I would avoid using interpolation to mean anything other than a sketching-in between two points, it's original meaning in mathematical graphing technique, wherein there are two points given and you have to guess the curvature and path of the line connecting them. This is similar to the usage made in in sampling theory, specifically where a Digital-to-Audio-Converter must make a "best guess" aka interpolation(/interpretation) of what to output when one or more samples are missing in the playback stream for CD or other digital sourceBandcoach (talk) 02:19, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the term "interpolation" referring to "replayed riffs or restated lyrics from another musical work" is a definition wholly originating from the website WhoSampled. All uses of "interpolate" to mean this seem to stem directly from that site. It doesn't reflect any pre-existing usage of the term. I speculate that the editor behind WhoSampled picked a ten-dollar word that he thought meant this or would be appropriate to use to mean it, but not really knowing at all what the term meant. But because few people know of another term for the practice, and likewise don't know what "interpolate" otherwise means, it's leaked into contemporary usage.

Note that the only citations in this article, as of this writing, are from WhoSampled.

Existing definitions of "interpolate" refer to mixing something of one type into something of another type, for example, interpolating images within text -- but not interpolating text within text, as both things are the same type, namely, text. In mathematics, it basically means inferring or estimating intermediate, non-sampled data points from existing sampled data points. In classical music, the closest thematic usage, it means "insert something of another genre/style in a work of another style." The only aspect that the WhoSampled definition of the term has in common with those meanings is "putting something into something else," for which there exist plenty of other words besides "interpolate," such as "integrate," "reintegrate," "intersperse," "insert," "mix," "disperse," "combine," "pepper," "spike," etc.

Prior to WhoSampled, replaying someone else's riff in your song was, at best, called an homage or called "borrowing" (and in early hip hop, restating someone else's lyric in your own song was called "biting rhymes"); at worst, it's called "a copyright violation." - Keith D. Tyler ¶ 16:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

This article is confusing the subject of musical interpolation, like the beatles in All You Need Is Love, which the legal concept of rerecording samples, which is a very distinct idea and topic. They should not appear together. Editor6060842 (talk) 10:30, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

With the way this term is being used, isn't this just Newspeak for plagiarism? Or ripping off? 66.212.144.98 (talk) 14:07, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

I’d like to open a discussion regarding the change made on 21 April 2026 to the definition of interpolation in popular music.

The edit summary described the replacement text as a “better definition with better citations,” but I think the change deserves discussion before the previous wording is simply replaced.

The previous wording was:

«In popular music, interpolation (also called a replayed sample) refers to using a melody—or portions of a melody (often with modified lyrics)—from a previously recorded song but re-recording the melody instead of directly sampling it. Interpolation is often cited as a legal defence to mask unlicensed sampling when the artist or label who owns the recording of the music declines to license the sample, or if licensing the piece of music is considered too costly.»

My concern is whether the current wording is actually clearer for readers unfamiliar with the subject. In my view, the newer version is more conceptual and technical in its phrasing, and therefore more difficult for a lay reader to immediately understand. The previous version explains the concept in a more concrete and accessible way, grounded in what is actually done musically.

I’d be interested in hearing other editors’ views. Aikclaes (talk) 20:52, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

I think the previous version was too wordy. See also WP:REFERSTO. It was also cited to two unusable sources. Popcornfud (talk) 12:02, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

I am concerned that the current lead definition introduces significant technical inaccuracies. While I acknowledge the stylistic preference to avoid "refers to" (per WP:REFERSTO) and the need for high-quality sources, the current text misrepresents the subject.

Specifically:

Technical inaccuracy: Defining interpolation as "recreating an element or recording" is misleading. Interpolation is the act of re-recording a composition precisely to avoid using the original master recording. The current phrasing conflates this with general recreation.

Misleading scope: Implying that interpolation is a tool for "altering constituent components" like drum and guitar tracks is incorrect; it is a composition-based technique.

I would like to propose the following version, which maintains brevity and stylistic guidelines while restoring factual accuracy:

"In popular music, interpolation (or a replayed sample) is the practice of re-recording a melody – or a portion of a melody – from a previously released song rather than using the original audio sample. Unlike sampling, which involves the direct use of a master recording, interpolation requires permission only from the owners of the musical composition, allowing artists to circumvent master-side licensing fees or refusals."

Regarding the process: I am disappointed that a stable, long-standing lead paragraph was replaced in its entirety without prior discussion. This definition has served the article for many years; replacing it unilaterally risks introducing errors.

I believe we should move toward a version that is both stylistically sound and factually precise.

Could we please discuss these specific technical points, and can you clarify which sources you consider "unusable" so we can find more authoritative replacements together? Aikclaes (talk) 13:57, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

​I would also like to clarify that I am aware this change was made unilaterally by Popcornfud, who replaced a stable, decade-long consensus with this new version, citing only the subjective opinion that it was a 'better definition.'

Replacing such established, long-standing text without prior discussion is poor collaborative practice. I believe it is necessary to point this out, as it explains why the current text suffers from the technical inaccuracies we are now debating – the process bypassed the necessary community oversight. Aikclaes (talk) 14:09, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Take a look at WP:BEENHERE:

On Wikipedia, nothing is set in stone. If the material is not suitable for Wikipedia according to the current standards, it will be deleted or corrected regardless of how old it is. Any text on any page is subject to change at any time, no matter how long it has been that way. If there is a good reason to remove long-standing text, the length of time it has been there should not be an obstacle.

There's no question that the current version of the lead could be improved, as could the article generally (it's not great right now). But everything we write on Wikipedia must be based on reliable sources (WP:RS), and the two sources used for your preferred definition aren't usable on Wikipedia. I'll sift through sources over the coming days and see if we can get the definition to align better. Popcornfud (talk) 03:22, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

I have opened a request for dispute resolution regarding our disagreement on the lead section of Interpolation (popular music). You can view the case and participate in the discussion here. Aikclaes (talk) 20:41, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

I’m not sure why you felt that was necessary given that I already put your suggested wording in the article. Popcornfud (talk) 01:01, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

My apologies. I was mistaken and hadn't realized you had already implemented those changes. I appreciate your work on the article and I'm sorry for initiating the dispute request under that misunderstanding. I’ve withdrawn the request, and I’m glad we’re on the same page now. Thanks for your patience. Aikclaes (talk) 10:52, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for withdrawing the request. I'm going to propose a new draft soon based on a batch of sources. Popcornfud (talk) 11:51, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

The legal mechanism behind what this article is describing is never accurately described in the article. The complete lack of academic sources should be a red flag about this article's quality. What we have here is an article that is masquerading as authoritative without understanding the subject at all. It should probably be deleted, or merged with the classical article to give a broad view of how the term "interpolation" has multiple, loose meanings in music. Trumpetrep (talk) 03:23, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

The article is based entirely on secondary sources deemed reliable for Wikipedia. If you think the article misrepresents the sources, please rewrite to fix it. If you know of additional/better sources, by all means, please use those to improve the article. Popcornfud (talk) 06:10, 1 August 2026 (UTC)

This article misunderstands basic copyright law. I've added a source from the US Copyright Office, but it won't fix the fundamental flaws of this article.

Simply citing a handful of reliable sources to say nothing of use is sophistic. The fact that none of the sources (aside from the one I just added) have any academic or legal heft is the red flag I mentioned. The reason this article relies on Rolling Stone and Sound on Sound is because it is superficial, and by being so, it misunderstands and misconveys its subject, which is a disservice to Wikipedia readers. Trumpetrep (talk) 03:29, 2 August 2026 (UTC)