a proper dance banger

Yeah this sounds big.

Prospa just isn’t missing at the minute!

Propsa is one of the most underrated dance acts of recent times. I expected more from his/theirs collab with Kettama, but as a main artist most of work is brilliant!

Debut album coming June 5, 2026 via Circoloco.

https://music.apple.com/gb/album/free-your-mind/1884730177

Edited March 31Mar 31 by JOTA

oh an album?! Give me a vinyl pre-order link!

EDIT:

https://prospamusic.bandcamp.com/album/free-your-mind

already done :)

Edited March 31Mar 31 by jszmiles

I assume we won't be getting there their best tracks: Exctasy, The One and Control The Party

Uploading Attachment...

Prospa are so underrated

This is a bop!

Great that this has gone Top 40, it's fabulous

Potential lawsuit (or Belters Only style cover up) coming for this... it appears they've stolen the vocal off Sybil's 1993 song 'Oh, How I Love You'

the original songwriters are credited but seemingly no permission/credit/royalties to Sybil. disappointing as I've been really enjoying the song!

@danG Well, I hope everything is OK. They likely don’t need Sybil’s direct permission, as long as the master rights were properly licensed by the CircoLoco label.

I used ChatGPT for the full explanation, also applies to similar cases in the music industry.

🎧 The Free Your Mind case

In “Free Your Mind” by Prospa, vocals from Sybil are used, taken from one of her earlier recordings.

What you noticed:

• The songwriters are credited ✔️

• Sybil does not appear publicly on platforms ❗

And yes — that can be legal.

---

🔑 Why isn’t Sybil credited publicly?

1. It’s likely a licensed master sample

If Prospa obtained:

• A master license (for the recording)

• A publishing license (for the composition)

👉 Then they are legally allowed to use the vocal.

But:

• Listing Sybil as “feat.” is not mandatory

• It depends on the agreement with the master owner

---

2. Sybil may not control the master

Very common with older recordings:

• The record label owns the master

• The singer doesn’t control reuse

• She may still get paid, but not visible credit

---

3. “Legal credits” vs “display credits”

• Full legal credits (metadata, rights societies, etc.) may include her

• Streaming platforms only show selected credits

👉 So:

• Her name might exist in backend metadata

• But not as a visible featured artist

---

4. This is not interpolation

This appears to be:

• The original audio (a sample), not a re-recording

So:

• Master rights are required

• Songwriters are credited

• Performer credit is optional publicly

---

⚠️ Is it legal?

✔️ Yes — if the sample is properly cleared
❌ No — if the vocal was used without permission

In a commercial release like this:
👉 It’s almost certainly fully cleared

🎧 Can master rights be seen in the credits?

✔️ 1. In full industry credits

In professional databases (such as:

• PRS for Music

• ASCAP

• Discogs

👉 Yes, you can usually find:

• Who owns the master

• Licensing information

• Technical details (ISRC, etc.)

---

❌ 2. On Spotify / Apple Music (what the public sees)

Usually you only see:

• Main artist

• Sometimes songwriters

• Producers

👉 But:

• ❌ The master owner is usually not clearly shown

• ❌ Sample licensing details are not displayed

---

🧾 3. What you can sometimes see

In some cases you may see:

• “℗ 2024 [Label Name]”

👉 That ℗ symbol indicates:

• Who controls the master recording rights

---

⚠️ Important

Even if you don’t see:

• The original singer

• Or sample clearance details

👉 It doesn’t mean it hasn’t been licensed
It just means that information is not public or is simplified on streaming platforms.

Edited Saturday at 16:493 days by JOTA