Sponsored Ad
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: WHAT DOES "REMIX" MEAN TO YOU...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default WHAT DOES "REMIX" MEAN TO YOU...

    good tidings every1...i was pondering over this thought this past weekend...."the remix" i am a true fan of the remix and believe any song can be remixed( i luv sampling).......a lot of my old hiphop records all had remixes to original songs done by the original(beatnuts,krs one, DITC) i stll think this is the gr8test thing but is becoming rare...my whole point is this man we all know as "diddy" clls himself the INVENTOR of the remix, this makes me cringe ecause remixes were done way b4 hm ....and actually in the reggae/roots/dancehall arena...this has been going on since the beginning of time(adapted songs are considered remixes in my eyes).....whats every1s take and whats your favorite remix...?
    heres mine, its a hiphop record too..
    casual...."thats how it is" remix

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Great Neck, New York
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,055

    Default

    Actually.....


    A person singing over a next person song is considered
    a cover song (Through Bands), and adapted (Through
    many records)

    I had a discussion with someone that remixed house
    music, and, said remix is more than taking an acapella
    from one song, and the instrumental (Version) from
    another.

    The Dreaded Splicing (Which is a big no no in Dubplates)
    are widly accepted in the world of House music
    to extend the riddim longer. In other words, extending
    the a riddim from 3 minutes to 7 minutes.

    IMHO A remix is using the raw vocals tracks of an artist,
    and building a riddim around the artist vocals.
    Not, throwing the vocals on an already used riddim.

    The word "Remix" is used too often nowadays, and,
    a person who does this for a living (Remix) don't even
    rate Puffy as a Remixer. For all he does is use a previous
    hit track, and put artist on it.
    OMNIFEX




    2007, Jeff Kang, Custom Audio Incorporated

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default

    your touching the reggae aspect of it and i agree, as far as the remix though, hiphop artists have been doing it for ages by taking a song, using a whole new beat w/new lyrics and possibly add on some of their patnaz!...... i feel ya though, thanks for your thoughts........p diddy sd he invented the remix and hs version of a remix is adding more people to an already popular song, like i sd earlier hiphops artists were doing this long b4 hm and waaaaaaaaaay better........chk any beatnut, showbiz & ag, diamond d, del tha funkee homosapien....i can go on for ever.....

  4. #4
    xiquetuk is offline Member needs to UPDATE email info or CONFIRM email address
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    116

    Default

    i never knew that p diddy called himself the inventor of the remix. what did he mean by this? does he mean in terms of sampling an old record (e.g. that old song by the police which became the biggie tribute song)? either way i can't see that he can claim to have invented any kind of remix - but maybe someone can enlighten me on this one.

    EDIT: oh i see, the remix which just features extra rappers/singers...well i would say that u-roy et al invented that kind of remix - taking a well known song and adding other voices to it on the same riddim. at least, they did it before puffy


    @ omnifex

    i can see what you mean by saying that "remix is more than taking an acapella from one song, and the instrumental (Version) from another" (or what your friend means - maybe you don't share this view) but at the same time, i don't see that it makes so much difference. in fact a lot of remixes made in this way show much more creativity (and IMO are much more worthy of ever having been conceived and produced) than many remixes which by the above criteria would be deemed 'superior'

    also, a remix could just as easily be reworking an instrumental track, adding some bits, removing others, cutting up loops and breaks, reordering things - it doesn't just have to be a different rendering of a vocal performance backed by a brand new instrumental

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Great Neck, New York
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,055

    Default

    Originally posted by DANCEHALLDAN
    your touching the reggae aspect of it and i agree, as far as the remix though, hiphop artists have been doing it for ages by taking a song, using a whole new beat w/new lyrics and possibly add on some of their patnaz!...... i feel ya though, thanks for your thoughts........p diddy sd he invented the remix and hs version of a remix is adding more people to an already popular song, like i sd earlier hiphops artists were doing this long b4 hm and waaaaaaaaaay better........chk any beatnut, showbiz & ag, diamond d, del tha funkee homosapien....i can go on for ever.....
    Yeah. I agree 100%

    I think his quote of popularity is subjective, due to Hip Hop
    and, R&B is the Mainstream music these days. In those times
    it was more over underground, and, popular in a certain
    community in the city so to speak.

    You couldn't find major radio stations pushing Hip Hop/R&B
    much less videos unless it was black American Operated.

    Look at Red Alert, Video Music Box, and, you will understand
    where I'm coming from.
    OMNIFEX




    2007, Jeff Kang, Custom Audio Incorporated

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default

    i think were on the same page, the reason why i sd p didy is because i accidentally watched mtv and accidentally listened to puffy for longer than what i thought.........weres craig mack?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    N.Y.C.
    Posts
    19,210
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default Re: WHAT DOES "REMIX" MEAN TO YOU...

    Originally posted by DANCEHALLDAN
    my whole point is this man we all know as "diddy" clls himself the INVENTOR of the remix, this makes me cringe ecause remixes were done way b4 hm
    His argument is that he started the way most remixes are done today. Instead of laying the same vocals over a new beat, he decided to re-record the song. Do any combination or all of the following:
    change the verses
    change the chorus
    change the beat
    add other artists

    And you have to give him credit. he was the first to do it. Back in the mid 90's everyone wanted a Puffy Remix... (including KRS One). And you'd be really silly if you think Puffy doesn't know that remix has been around before him. He's just being a cocky bastard who's using an old theory of crowning himself
    Michael Jackson - King Of Pop
    Howard Stern - King Of All Media
    P. Diddy - Inventor of the remix

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Great Neck, New York
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,055

    Default

    Originally posted by xiquetuk

    @ omnifex

    i can see what you mean by saying that "remix is more than taking an acapella from one song, and the instrumental (Version) from another" (or what your friend means - maybe you don't share this view) but at the same time, i don't see that it makes so much difference. in fact a lot of remixes made in this way show much more creativity (and IMO are much more worthy of ever having been conceived and produced) than many remixes which by the above criteria would be deemed 'superior'

    also, a remix could just as easily be reworking an instrumental track, adding some bits, removing others, cutting up loops and breaks, reordering things -
    it doesn't just have to be a different rendering of a vocal performance backed by a brand new instrumental
    In reference to what I highlighted.

    What you explained in terms of the instrumental is
    considered a remix. Now, compare that to taking the RAW
    Vocals of your favorite artist. Throw him on a previous
    hit song, by playing the instrumental, and tell me which
    one would you consider a remix.

    A person who Remix for a living, is hired by the artist,
    or record company, handed the raw vocals, and, builds
    a new instrumental around his/her vocals.

    I would imagine you would need to buy House music
    to understand. For each house song, it is remixed by
    a different remixer, and, that mix is credited to the
    person who made the remix.





    OMNIFEX




    2007, Jeff Kang, Custom Audio Incorporated

  9. #9
    xiquetuk is offline Member needs to UPDATE email info or CONFIRM email address
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    116

    Default

    i consider both to be remixes...but different kinds of remix

    the point i was making in the part which you highlighted red was simply to expand on your definition of a remix to clarify that it wasn't just about remaking a beat to go under the same vocal as the original

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default

    i think what he is talking about would be considered a "refix" taking some1's acapella and putting over a different beat....some hiphop dj's cll this a blend some a refix some a remix......i agree the remix word is like im sorry, every1 says it but never means it

  11. #11
    xiquetuk is offline Member needs to UPDATE email info or CONFIRM email address
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    116

    Default

    Originally posted by DANCEHALLDAN
    the remix word is like im sorry, every1 says it but never means it


    yeah i see that some people call things remix/refix/blend to cover different stuff, i just can't really be bothered so call everything a remix. it seems to me that the underlying idea behind differentiating between remix and refix is to imply that making a refix is less creative or something cos all you're doing is marrying the creations of two other people/persons buy i don't think this is true...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default

    i agree....some of the refix's i hear though do take some originality even if your putting an acapella over another riddim....especially the one i did were i took jaheim's "fabolous" and put it over the "queen majesty riddim".....i thinkim saying too much...peace yall thanx for the wordz of wisdom

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Great Neck, New York
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,055

    Default

    This why I like message boards

    Reading and understanding different views.
    Why, not totaly agreeing on the way a person
    view things, can understand it from their point of
    view.

    In reference to matching an Acapella on one record,
    to an Instrumental on another, I must've done this
    too many times to not consider it nothing special
    in my point of view. But. To see someone create
    a new riddim or modify the original riddim to the
    point it sounds completely different, I have to
    credit where credit is do.

    Its more than likely because I don't know how
    to do it is why I give it more credit.
    OMNIFEX




    2007, Jeff Kang, Custom Audio Incorporated

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default

    this is true.....i guess like you sd peoples pointz of views are the most important....some feel if it sounds dope its dope, if sounds dope and was made in an original artistical way then its even more dope.......i can play some stuff i did to some and theyll be like thts amazing,if i play some of the stuff for omnifex, hell probably laugh.....then again i might play somehting i redid for omnifex and hell be like "now thts tight" then i play it for the average listener and they be like" you made tht, i cant tell".....my apoligies for the jabbering....too much of tht gaaaaaanja! see thts pretty cool right ? not original but cool

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    N.Y.C.
    Posts
    19,210
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Originally posted by OMNIFEX
    This why I like message boards

    Reading and understanding different views.
    Why, not totaly agreeing on the way a person
    view things, can understand it from their point of
    view.
    Pitty most threads to turn into a "GUH SUCK YU MADDA" shouting game.

  16. #16
    xiquetuk is offline Member needs to UPDATE email info or CONFIRM email address
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    116

    Default

    yeah i can see that if you do it a lot or hear a lot of refixes done in this way then you begin to see that it's not a big deal, not particularly hard to do and therefore maybe not deserving of artistic credit etc.

    but having said that, ultimately it's about how good is the end product. obviously this is subjective, but here's my view on it: i've heard lots and lots of remixes where someone has built the instrumental from scratch to go with a pre-existing vocal. sometimes it's really good. but often the remix adds nothing to the original or, worse, adds a bassline that is out of key with the vocal or a keyboard part or drum pattern or whatever that just go with the rhythm of the voice. these kind of remixes, which i think are badly concevied and badly produced, in my view are less deserving of credit than a well put-together refix which has been conceived in an original manner (not just whacking the latest bounty on the latest hip hop hit - though this type can be good too) and produced well, maybe with effects on the vocals or instrumental or extra beats or drum rolls or whatever

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    LOS ANGELES
    Age
    38
    Posts
    114

    Default

    were all definately on the same page now

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Great Neck, New York
    Age
    34
    Posts
    8,055

    Default

    Originally posted by DANCEHALLDAN
    this is true.....i guess like you sd peoples pointz of views are the most important....some feel if it sounds dope its dope, if sounds dope and was made in an original artistical way then its even more dope.......i can play some stuff i did to some and theyll be like thts amazing,if i play some of the stuff for omnifex, hell probably laugh.....
    I wouldn't laugh. Everyone felt very proud of themselves
    when they made their first Remix. You probably played
    it over so many times, and, still can't grow tiresome of
    it.

    Save that remix, listen to it, like, 2 years from now
    and, you will not rate it anymore.

    Why?

    Simple. People who remix, always strive for better.
    So, that once wicked remix, will be criticize by your
    most demanding critic...................yourself.

    I use to do the Acapella to a not the original riddim
    remix.

    Then, I moved over to vocal Acapella, and, DJ
    Acapella combinations on the not the original
    riddim remix.

    Then to sampling, looping, and having certain
    Acappellas sing versions at particular times, like
    they both were in the studio.

    Then.............. ah you get the point.
    OMNIFEX




    2007, Jeff Kang, Custom Audio Incorporated

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •