Vindicated By No Less Than TOM MOULTON

[markydefad]

I've been decrying the pitiful state of the current art of remixing. You hear a good single on the radio--you buy the CD single hoping for a nice extended version and what you get sounds nothing like the original record. Included are 7 or 8 remixes-inferior in every way to the single, including a 13 minute arena anthem--none of which you ever want to hear again.



I came across an interesting interview with landmark disco mixer Tom Moulton. His comments on this subject:



"My biggest complaint about music is--if you hear a short version, you want the long...in other words: you're going in to the store to buy that record because you heard it on the radio. Why not have the option of being able to buy a longer version of the same song,but that has the same elements that the short version has--that's why you're buying it.



Well, because if...like when I first heard Chumbawumba, you know, I loved that song ("Tubthumping"???). The minute I heard it...I've always been a fan of theirs anyway, but when I went in to buy the record, I returned it. I brought it back so fast and I said: They took out the hook of the song! That's why I'm buying the record. I'm buying the record for that hook and they took it out!"



Does he like any of today's remixers?



"I just don't particularly like what they do today. And what they only ever do is take a vocal sample or whatever and then adding their own track to it. That's not really what I consider remixing. I just call that, you know, re-producing".



Any comments?

[keefelc]

Yeah, I'm curious what other people think about Tom Moulton's comments also. Mark, you and I have discussed this topic at length and we're in total agreement! I'm just wondering are we turning into our parents ("Music was so much better in my younger days!"), or is it the state of the current dance music scene?

[BrunoRepublic]

I echo Tom Moulton's sentiments. The "extended remix" captured the essence of what disco was all about -- taking something good, and then taking it over the top!



Unfortunately, the good ol' extended version seems to have died sometime around 1992.



The term "remix" has been so completely misapplied as to render the word utterly meaningless. For a while, a few people were calling contemporary remixes "reconstructions" -- which is what they really are. Unfortunately, this sensible trend did not catch on. Sometimes I don't mind reconstructions; it's interesting how a new song can be constructed around another's vocals -- but I still like the "more of a good thing" extended version (which if you do see them now, are called "re-edits"). But a lot of these reconstructions are not done with the aim of enhancing the original song, they're done to promote the "remixer" as an artist in themselves. Perhaps the most appalling example I've found of this was the 12" of the Pet Shop Boys "Liberation" which was actually a 12-minute rap song by E Smoove. There is not so much as a split-second sample of the original song in this so-called "remix". Man, was I infuriated by that!



The other thing about contemporary mixes is that even when they follow the form of the original song, the philosophy is "strip out all the chords and harmony, and just leave dry drums and the vocal". I've read in several music-making publications that this is the ideal strategy for club music. Who the hell decided that this was best?! The chords and harmonies are the music to me. One cannot live on drums alone!

[Paulo]

About Tom Moulton interview:



He is absolutely correct. I've experienced that in 1996, when I first heard the album version of BEFORE by the PET SHOP BOYS on the brazilian radio. I thought it was such a beautiful song... When I went to buy the single, it a a disappointment:



First of all, I had 4 singles to choose: PART ONE, PART TWO, THE US VERSION and THE PC ENHANCED. Each contained different mixes (some the same, but some not).



One of the singles included 8 or 9 remixes of BEFORE, none of them satisfactory... the final versions are so distant from the original song that as it was said in this thread they should be called re-produced, not just remixed... It wasn't a REMIX in fact... It was a new version of the song...



I've got the exactly opposite feeling when I first heard WEST END GIRLS, back in the middle 80's... To my amusement the 12" was released here in Brazil. When I bought it, it was a big surprise: the remix boosted the music to a higher plateux, it used all elements of the original song, with the full melody and hook on it, just extending the instrumental parts of the song. That is a real good remix which highlights all the elements of the song, extending them, not adding thing to the point of making of it another thing (as it is the practice these days).



That illustrates a bit the difference between remixing in the 70's/80's and in the 90's.



I heard on MTV maybe 2 years ago that now when DJ's remix a song, they wantend to be credited as composers and receive royalties.



They said that the original song (played and arranged by the artist) would not sell unless a remix of it was done. The cited as a major example JAMIROQUAI's SPACE COWBOY whose album version (as they said) was awful and did nothing on the charts, while the remix was a smash.



Paulo

[PhyllisHyman]

I agree with a lot of what's been said. One thing to remember about remixes these days is that they are primarily a marketing tool. If a dance record shows high up in DJ/club charts then there is more chance of it being licensed to a compilation which is a huge source of income. And obviously the more comps the more money. To get a track high in the charts then it has to appeal to as broad a cross section of DJs as possible so they will put it in their chart return. The only way to do this is to have ridiculous amounts of remixes so everyone from Pop to hardhouse DJs will play it (sometimes I think they don't even play it, they just put it in their chart to continue getting free records).

[markydefad]

Thanks for all the input guys, but I am left with one question: Wouldn't the average music buyer who is purchasing a CD single of a song he or she heard on the radio want an extended version of that song on the CD single, or at least ONE mix that approximates the elements of the song they liked in the first place?



Why must the CD single contain ONLY deconstructions and reproductions of that song. Couldn't the original producers do an extended version? JUST ONE TRACK! Just one track that enhances the original CD track-- that would appeal to the average CD buyer who likes that particular song--not just trendy DJ's looking for the chill-out/feeze dried/poppin' fresh/finger lickin'good/supersized remixes that appeal to that small, small element of trendy club habituaes?



I'm Just Askin'!!!



_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-12 14:31 ]</font>

[Bernie]

I hear ya Marky,



It is really amazing how some DJ's have managed to take a great track and mutilate it beyond recognition and call it a remix. I agree that these should be rightfully called "reconstructions" or something similar. In some cases "reconstructions" actually lend a new perspective to a song, but it can't be done at the expense of the original.



I once asked the great Disco remixer Rick Giantos if he was open to different styles of music and his reply to me was:



---------

I was always pretty open minded. There's no style I really don't care for. Maybe an individual track, here and there. What I don't like to this day are tracks that get remixed or rerecorded and the life taken out of them. Sometimes redoing in a totally different format can be miraculous and

sometime it can be disastrous. Case in point:



GREAT redo: k.d. lang, "Sexuality"

DISASTROUS redo: Cher, "One by One." (If you haven't heard the original UK album, run and get it (if you can find it)."

------------



So there you have another remixer of the Disco days giving his feeling on the topic and pretty much echoing Tom's sentiments.



Keep in mind that this started as far back as 1979 with Jonathon Fearing's classic remix of D. D. Sound's "Café" on Emergency. His remix was radically different from the original since he stripped almost all the lyrics and just left us with "Café, café, café..." looping in the back. Great work, but others took too much of a good thing and essentially turned extended versions into dubs.



As for me, the first time I started noticing the trend really taking hold was back in 1983 with the Duke Bootee dance version promo 12" release of the Comateens "Get Off My Case" on Mercury. If anything it became more of a "dub" than a remix. Stuttering effects, ear candy and what not-big deal since I wasn't that thrilled of the song. That all changed with the following release.



The release that really drove me nuts since I actually bought the import 12" after hearing it on LIR was Vicious Pink's "Cccan't you See" on Parlophone from 1984. I went out of my way to find the import which had 4 versions of "Cccan't You See" and none of them were like the version I heard that got me to buy the thing in the first place.



I'm pretty sure people like Junior Vasquez and Danny Tenaglia are laughing all the way to the bank. And they should since someone is buying their stuff. These people are very talented and I enjoy most of their work, but the record labels should place a radio edit and an extended version based on the original riffs. Everything else should be icing. While we are at it, they should be pressed as double pak vinyl so as not to compress the grooves for no reason.



_________________

Defender of the Disco beat,



Bernard Lopez



================================



owner & publisher of http://www.discomusic.com



================================

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bernie on 2001-12-12 17:12 ]</font>

[markydefad]

Bernie,



What's the deal with the Cher "One By One" remix? I have the CD single on that one. The original cut is sort of a mellow 100 bpm type track and then Junior Vasquez jacks the tempo up on a dance version, right? I liked both those versions.



Is there another version I don't know about or did you dislike the versions I mentioned?

[markydefad]

And one more thing...I HATE, HATE, HATE anything that the dirty hands of Danny Tenaglia have touched. I have at least three CD's of his mixing and they are all AWFUL. Even if you know the song, there is nothing left that resembles a song after this so-called "celebrated" DJ gets done with it.



There, now I feel better. I've wanted to spit some venom his way for a long time. I feel he owes me the cost of the 3 pitiful CD's I purchased, because I heard he was the Hot DJ several years ago.



_________________

Make My Feet Wanna Dance!

Markydefad

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: markydefad on 2001-12-12 17:08 ]</font>

[PhyllisHyman]

I've had the same experience with Danny Tenaglia mixed cds. I bought Global Underground London and was so dissappointed. However I've heard him play twice here at Ultimate Base and can only describe the experience as spiritual (I was not on chems or alcohol by the way). His timing, his choice of tunes, everything was stunning. He'd drop a vocal in at the most perfect moment, played dark,light and everything in between. One of the nicest things was that he wasn't limited to 2 hours as is usually the case here, but had some time to develop the whole evening. I am not a fan of his remixes but when he plays it's something else altogether.

[markydefad]

Well P.H.,



I respect your opinion and I haven't heard him play live, but his CD's SUCK Dead Donkey Dick, IMO.



I'm feelin' bitchy today, to quote Miss Millie Jackson.

[Bernie]

On 2001-12-12 14:12, markydefad wrote:

Bernie,



What's the deal with the Cher "One By One" remix? I have the CD single on that one. The original cut is sort of a mellow 100 bpm type track and then Junior Vasquez jacks the tempo up on a dance version, right? I liked both those versions.



Is there another version I don't know about or did you dislike the versions I mentioned?

Actually the reference to Cher is not by me, but a quote from Rick Giantos in one of our music discussions from a year or two back. I've bolded his quote to separate it better from my text above and below his paragraph.

[markydefad]

Bernie,



I figured that it was his quote, but I guess I thought maybe you quizzed him as to why he felt that way...never mind, it's all a matter of personal taste. But I liked the Junior Vasquez remix of Cher's "One By One". And, of the "Believe" remixes, Junior's is the one I chose to put on my own tape. Although, that's an instance where I would have loved an extended version of the 3:30 single.

[Bernie]

On 2001-12-12 14:19, markydefad wrote:

And one more thing...I HATE, HATE, HATE anything that the dirty hands of Danny Tenaglia have touched. I have at least three CD's of his mixing and they are all AWFUL. Even if you know the song, there is nothing left that resembles a song after this so-called "celebrated" DJ gets done with it.



There, now I feel better. I've wanted to spit some venom his way for a long time. I feel he owes me the cost of the 3 pitiful CD's I purchased, because I heard he was the Hot DJ several years ago.

Ouch,

I really enjoyed the 2 CD DJ set of his Global Underground in Athens. Okay, I received it as a promo, but it is great. Marky, give that one a listen and let us know.



As for his remixes, I loved what he did with "When I Grow Up" by Garbage. Again, this is a promo 12" from the UK so it may be different from the commercial pressing.

[Bernie]

On 2001-12-12 17:29, markydefad wrote:

Bernie,



I figured that it was his quote, but I guess I thought maybe you quizzed him as to why he felt that way...

I see what you mean now, but no. I didn't quiz him on it since I didn't know anything about the track.

[markydefad]

Bernie,



I have "Color Me Danny" a 2-CD set and "Gag Me With A Tune". The title of the latter aptly sums up my opinion of the 3 CD's.

[JussiK]

What about Danny Krivit, now that he has his mix cd out (Grass Roots: Danny Krivit). Good as his choices of material generally are (War, Nina Simone, Voyage etc), don't you kinda wish he would not just have concentrated on the percussion elements of say, Love Unlimited Orchestra's Theme From King Kong? This of course showcases the tendency to just get a good groove going as opposed to giving dancers actual songs to dance to. This dates all the way back to the Fearing remix of CAFE Bernie mentioned. When that came out many felt disappointed - I for one would not dare to spin the remix without slipping in the vocal bits from the original that people liked.



Still, it's nice to hear a good record getting atention from a respected name dj like Krivit 25 years after the track's heyday, even if it's only for the break.

[Jeff H]

Marky--



Ohmigawd, were we separated at birth or what?!! I agree 100 percent with everything you (and the esteemed Mr. Moulton) said about the deplorable state of "remixing" these days. "Re-constructing" would be a better word, since most remixes now destroy a song to rebuild it in some DJ's image--often without any vocals or even a melody (which is sort of essential to a good song, if you ask me). And who the hell are these DJs? What gives them the right to destroy another artist's/producer's work to appeal to some drugged-out circuit queen?! (Don't even get me started on the music played at circuit parties and raves...!)



And I will agree that the remix of "One by One" was a damn good reworking of the original ballad. Unfortunately, though, this isn't usually the case. Marky's right (again!) when he says that an extended version of the album track of "Believe" (and especially "Strong Enough"!) would have been preferable to any of the crappy remixes that were offered. I had similar high hopes a year or two ago for Bette Midler's "I'm Beautiful," another great song whose potential was destroyed by remixers.



And hey, Marky: I lost your e-mail address, so write to me soon (about the charts or whatever!).



Jeff



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jeff H on 2001-12-25 11:41 ]</font>

[The Lord of Flatbush]

On 2001-12-12 13:51, Bernie wrote:

I hear ya Marky,



It is really amazing how some DJ's have managed to take a great track and mutilate it beyond recognition and call it a remix. I agree that these should be rightfully called "reconstructions" or something similar. In some cases "reconstructions" actually lend a new perspective to a song, but it can't be done at the expense of the original.



I once asked the great Disco remixer Rick Giantos if he was open to different styles of music and his reply to me was:



---------

I was always pretty open minded. There's no style I really don't care for. Maybe an individual track, here and there. What I don't like to this day are tracks that get remixed or rerecorded and the life taken out of them. Sometimes redoing in a totally different format can be miraculous and

sometime it can be disastrous. Case in point:



GREAT redo: k.d. lang, "Sexuality"

DISASTROUS redo: Cher, "One by One." (If you haven't heard the original UK album, run and get it (if you can find it)."

------------



So there you have another remixer of the Disco days giving his feeling on the topic and pretty much echoing Tom's sentiments.



Keep in mind that this started as far back as 1979 with Jonathon Fearing's classic remix of D. D. Sound's "Café" on Emergency. His remix was radically different from the original since he stripped almost all the lyrics and just left us with "Café, café, café..." looping in the back. Great work, but others took too much of a good thing and essentially turned extended versions into dubs.



As for me, the first time I started noticing the trend really taking hold was back in 1983 with the Duke Bootee dance version promo 12" release of the Comateens "Get Off My Case" on Mercury. If anything it became more of a "dub" than a remix. Stuttering effects, ear candy and what not-big deal since I wasn't that thrilled of the song. That all changed with the following release.



The release that really drove me nuts since I actually bought the import 12" after hearing it on LIR was Vicious Pink's "Cccan't you See" on Parlophone from 1984. I went out of my way to find the import which had 4 versions of "Cccan't You See" and none of them were like the version I heard that got me to buy the thing in the first place.



I'm pretty sure people like Junior Vasquez and Danny Tenaglia are laughing all the way to the bank. And they should since someone is buying their stuff. These people are very talented and I enjoy most of their work, but the record labels should place a radio edit and an extended version based on the original riffs. Everything else should be icing. While we are at it, they should be pressed as double pak vinyl so as not to compress the grooves for no reason.



_________________

Defender of the Disco beat,



Bernard Lopez



================================



owner & publisher of http://www.discomusic.com



================================



<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Bernie on 2001-12-12 17:12 ]</font>

Great point Bernie! I often wondered about the difference between the term re-edit and reconstructed.



Aren't they measured to be the same terms?



I remembered noticing "Reconstructed by John "Jellybean" Benitez" - Twice as Nice - 52nd Street on A&M Records in the eighties.



It was originally an import.



What do you think?