>Must EVERYTHING be remixed?
I'm feeling Elson on this point, but I'm conflicted about remix-mania. I think the deluge of remixes (which now also includes a house remix of Dexter Gordon's "Love For Sale", out on Tangent Beats) that is going on now is done strictly for commercial reasons, to extract the maximum sales out of a song by hitting as many markets as possible. If that means going well outside the genre of the original, that's fine. Just look at all those 2 step remixes of rap songs. Ugh. Even MJ Cole fell into that when he tried to do De La Soul, and it didn't work. It's just tacky.
I think it makes "our music" (for lack of a better term) lose a certain amount of credibility, for it's basically saying any artist can get into that style. Dance remixes of the Rolling Stones, Aretha Franklin, Eminem and now the Jackson Five? Come on. And the fact that these records become highly successful and coveted makes me feel that much sicker.
I personally would like to see some kind of cap instituted on remixes. I think too many people (producers, DJs, and fans) focus too much on those instead of creating all original material.
But the reason I say I'm conflicted is because I know that remixes have played a significant role in the progression of dance music dating back to early disco. Reworkings of "Love is the Message" and "Ten Percent" helped to usher in a whole new style of production and way of looking at the music's power. Despite the large amount of chaff, there are some mixes today that make you say "daaaaaamn!" Plus I'm realistic in knowing folks have to eat, and remixes brings in the bacon. But I think they can overwhelm us and make us neglect people who are out there trying to do their own, original thang.
Anthony
Get FREE Email/Voicemail with 15MB at Lycos Communications at http://comm.lycos.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Dec 09 2000 - 14:40:26 CET