What does a good remix mean to you? What should a good remix be?
What does a good remix mean to you? What should a good remix be? Posted on: 02.05.2013 by Yu Santellano Just something I want to gauge opinion on, and that is what a good remix really should be.The reason I ask is because I believe that a remix of a track should be done by somebody who genuinely wants to improve on and is inspired by the original track - because they really believe they have a better mix, can add better elements, and generally make it 100x cooler, but still sticking within certain limits, such as keeping it recognisable as the same track. However, it seems that a lot more remixes I'm seeing are simply "genre checklists" - a single gets released, along with of course the original mix, and a lot of rather exciting looking remixes, which actually just turn out to be genre work. There'll be a drum & bass version, a dubstep version, a dance/club version (if by some miracle it's not already a dance track) and so on, just for the sake of having a version of that track in those specific genres. In the worst case, these tracks may bear little or no resemblance to the original track, to the point where it's essentially a different track sampling the same lyrics. Anyone else feel the same way about this? | |
| Augustine Mitzen 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by Era 7
|
| Yu Santellano 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by lethal_pizzle
For me, I need to be able to look at a remix and say "THAT is what should have been made in the first place". One thing I'm trying to get at is that some remixes feel less like the original track has been 're'-mixed, and more like somebody has made something completely different and sampled the original track. And @Guiltyblade - you've definitely got a point with the "same track being remixed over and over again" thing - I used to browse some music blog, forgot its name now, and there was one point where barely a week went by without seeing a Lana Del Ray remix. A good example to demonstrate what I'm talking about is Bingo Player's "Out of My Mind" versus the Dada Life remix of the same. I listened to both tracks and I didn't believe I could find a common element between either. The DL remix doesn't even use the vocals that define the song's title. On the flip side, a good example is the 174 mix of Delta Heavy's "Get By" - even though it changes to Drum & Bass, it keeps the vocals, and the piano riff, and much of the inspiration from the original track can be identified. The only deal here is that this is more of a VIP mix in reality, as it's done by the same artists rather than someone else. Also, Jason Nevins' remix of NERD - Rockstar is another that I consider to be an inspired remix and in fact, better than the original track. On that note, sometimes I'll hear the remix first, before I know anything about the original track - which is exactly what happened with Rockstar (above) and Rita Ora's "How We Do" (I first heard the Jump Smokers remix), I go back to check the original out, and realise the remix is in fact much much better. |
| Marshall Aby 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by StephanV
|
| Pansy Shiveley 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by CountenanT
But I guess it's just the same with remixes as with original releases: too much people producing too much stuff without maintaining proper quality standards. |
| Yu Santellano 02.05.2013 | Just something I want to gauge opinion on, and that is what a good remix really should be. The reason I ask is because I believe that a remix of a track should be done by somebody who genuinely wants to improve on and is inspired by the original track - because they really believe they have a better mix, can add better elements, and generally make it 100x cooler, but still sticking within certain limits, such as keeping it recognisable as the same track. However, it seems that a lot more remixes I'm seeing are simply "genre checklists" - a single gets released, along with of course the original mix, and a lot of rather exciting looking remixes, which actually just turn out to be genre work. There'll be a drum & bass version, a dubstep version, a dance/club version (if by some miracle it's not already a dance track) and so on, just for the sake of having a version of that track in those specific genres. In the worst case, these tracks may bear little or no resemblance to the original track, to the point where it's essentially a different track sampling the same lyrics. Anyone else feel the same way about this? |
| Augustine Mitzen 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by Era 7
|
| Edwardo Rothenberger 02.05.2013 | Remixes have always been hit and miss. Some of them bear absolutely no relation to the original, but can be great nonetheless, or they ARE the track where it's just made the original how you believe it should have been in the first place; or it's a load of crap that was commissioned to try and appeal to a wider audience who would not normally touch that track with a barge pole, and probably still won't after the appalling remix. One of the very worst remixes I ever heard that made me hold my head in my hands was when Jr Vasquez was The Man in New York at The Sound Factory. Big record companies were getting everything remixed by him. The worst was his remix of an Elton John track. Truly awful. Why, oh why? |
| Rodolfo Oriol 02.05.2013 | Everybody believes differently, so when you hear a track you maybe believe "wow, the vocals are sick!" but the instruments isnt. That's when you get your chance to do something new to the track, give it your twist. It's always fun to hear a remix of maybe a tech house track > transformed into a trance song. Or vocals from a movie > transformed into house. For me it's always fun to hear different versions of a track. So a good remix for me is a track that still got a good glow of the original track, and a twist from the remixer. |
| Yu Santellano 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by lethal_pizzle
For me, I need to be able to look at a remix and say "THAT is what should have been made in the first place". One thing I'm trying to get at is that some remixes feel less like the original track has been 're'-mixed, and more like somebody has made something completely different and sampled the original track. And @Guiltyblade - you've definitely got a point with the "same track being remixed over and over again" thing - I used to browse some music blog, forgot its name now, and there was one point where barely a week went by without seeing a Lana Del Ray remix. A good example to demonstrate what I'm talking about is Bingo Player's "Out of My Mind" versus the Dada Life remix of the same. I listened to both tracks and I didn't believe I could find a common element between either. The DL remix doesn't even use the vocals that define the song's title. On the flip side, a good example is the 174 mix of Delta Heavy's "Get By" - even though it changes to Drum & Bass, it keeps the vocals, and the piano riff, and much of the inspiration from the original track can be identified. The only deal here is that this is more of a VIP mix in reality, as it's done by the same artists rather than someone else. Also, Jason Nevins' remix of NERD - Rockstar is another that I consider to be an inspired remix and in fact, better than the original track. On that note, sometimes I'll hear the remix first, before I know anything about the original track - which is exactly what happened with Rockstar (above) and Rita Ora's "How We Do" (I first heard the Jump Smokers remix), I go back to check the original out, and realise the remix is in fact much much better. |
| Tesha Freudenstein 02.05.2013 | original or remix really doesn't mean much to me. i'll play whatever version sounds better to me. don't really care if the remixer "added" something to the track. |
| Alla Bluemke 02.05.2013 | I actually very often tend to never even bother with many remixes and go with the original if possible. If I really like the original then I look into some remixes and decide how I feel about them. I agree that a remix really needs to add something to the track to make it stand out while still maintaining an element of the original. I absolutely hate when a remix is done and it sound normal at first and then goes a completely opposite direction. This can be seen with many popular dance tracks being changed to say electro and including some massive drop. I believe within the commercial electronic music remixes tend to be really crappy on an already crappy track to begin with. When you get into some deeper stuff and more obscure stuff thats when it gets interesting to me. If for instance I see say Claes Rosen, or Fon.Leman do a remix I almost automatically believe its gonna be awesome. There are some artist I trust, and know there sound very well that I know 90% of the time I will like it regardless. So sometimes I like remixes, and sometimes I hate them. I do hate seeing the same track being remix over and over and over again. I usually just find the one I like and stick to it forever and never listen to any other after that because I don't want a thousand remixes of the same track bogging up my library either. |
| Brunilda Kora 02.05.2013 | This is gonna be a good discussion. I'll chime in when I get home! |
| Marshall Aby 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by StephanV
|
| Pansy Shiveley 02.05.2013 |
Originally Posted by CountenanT
But I guess it's just the same with remixes as with original releases: too much people producing too much stuff without maintaining proper quality standards. |
<< Back to General DiscussionReply