From cognition Sent Wed, Dec 8th 1999, 19:35
From cognition Sent Wed, Dec 8th 1999, 19:35
TP: we'll have to politely agree to disagree on this one :) i know you're playing out the phats and smalls remix of earth, wind & fire's september, and i can see why: it keeps the song intact while making it more dj-friendly. if people pick up on that, that's great in my opinion because that's a beautiful song and has been remixed with care (though phats and smalls' other input might have many think that this couldn't be done! :)). and, being a fan of his work since the day i heard his first record on relief, i'm super happy to see paul johnson getting paid for his "get get down" track. this is a great song, just like he's been doing great songs since the mid 1990s. "get get down" shows paul doing his tracky house thing and it's not like he jumped on any bandwagon, that's his style. paul has been working extremely hard to get his due and i hope this helps him out. but, i'm stickin' to my guns on this filter house remix of bob marley. i think the biggest problem is that mr. marley himself couldn't have OKed or nayed the remix (because he is no longer alive). anyway, different strokes for different folks. some like it and some don't. if we all agreed on everything the world would be a boring place. ditto for the panthalassa reworks of miles, etc. andrew duke :) xxxxxxxxxx@xxx.xxx wrote: > Slow down for a minute cats - please! > > When I first heard this track I was sitting in my hotel in Kassel Germany > watching MTV Europe (thus I was watching the video). I too (at first) thought > it was a bit cheezy. But then I heard the same track in the club later that > night and formed a different opinion. > > When I play records, my goal is to present the music in a different way than > what most cats are use to hearing. I knew when I heard this record in the > club that I could present it in a difrerent way (not just mixing, scratching, > etc., but also in song selections before and after I play this record). > Everytime I play this record (especially at the Velvet Lounge - my residency > here in the Detroit area) my audience goes crazy - THEY LOVE IT!!!!! I like > to think that I play GOOD music to counter act all the bullshit that djs pull > of their local TOP 10 walls in record stores just because of the hype of a > certain record. I play the hell out of Paul Johnson's "Get Get Down" even > though it has become a huge cossover hit in Europe. I don't hear anyone > objecting to his success. Back in the day (pre-1985) there were only a hand > full of house recordings on vinyl. So most djs playing this style of music > also played 80's POP artists like Madonna, Michael Jackson & Prince (all of > which I still play) in addition to deep tracks from Italy like "Love n Music" > and "I Loive The Piano", and disco records like "Heavy Vibes", etc.. I know > the issue here is not totally the POP appeal of the mix itself, but it is a > part of your complaint as to the pressumed marketing concept behind this > filtered remake/remix. In defense of this record, I'd just like to say that > perhaps cats should focus more on the message in the music. It's not as > though this record is going to cause a revolution in music as though it were > re-inventing the wheel. However, I've heard much worse than this believe me. > In fact, we all have!!!!! > > Allow me to point out that this record is also introducing the idea of Bob's > music to a new young audience who perhaps had never heard of Bob Marley. And > re-inforced by artists releases by Lauryn Hill and others, it has sparked a > new interest in the man and his music / messages. How could that be a bad > thing??? > > Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion respectfully. All I am saying > is that maybe we should not be so judgemental unless / until we can find out > from the persons who performed this mix as to their intentions behind this > record. Just because you see a record like this (and many other records) > experiencing a mass promotional blitz with videos with crossover success, > doesn't mean we should attack the producers / musicians behind the music. > Record Company excutives are the cats who make the decision how the records > are introduced to the public. These cats are the ones who are interested in > mass marketing, huges sales numbers, etc. > > I'm not saying you should like this record. I just wanted to give you cats > another point of view. Because I know you are fair individuals, I'm sure you > will at least consider my points. > > Happy Holidays! > > TP > > In a message dated 12/8/99 9:54:37 AM Eastern Standard Time, > xxxxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxx.xx writes: > > << > What I don't understand is how the label could > have missed the boat on this Bob Marley "Sun > Is Shining" travesty. Like, duh, Bob Marley's music > is top quality *as it was released*, and it doesn't > get any worse with time, and thus doesn't need > a "fresh new update". His best stuff is classic > material, no doubt about it. To remix Marley > with *filter house-y* BS as has been done, > makes it seem like the label is trying to make > Marley "of the moment" (ie. current dance craze > to be forgotten when the next one hits), > which is a huge dis-service to his legacy. What > the label also seems to have missed is that the > people who get into and dance to and enjoy this > Bob Marley "Sun Is Shining" filter-house remix > BS are, in all liklihood, definitely not going to say > to themselves "hey, i'm digging this filter house remix > of Marley; though I assume his original material doesn't > sound like this, I'm going to investigate his back > catalog." Heavy on the sarcasm here, of course. > Plain and simple, Marley should be marketed in > a classy way, to remix him as has been done with > "Sun Is Shining" is the opposite of class--it's plain > *crass*. I'm hearing this mix mixed in with stuff > like Celine Dion and Shania Twain and Jennifer > Lopez and pinnacle pop stuff like that. > And I haven't heard anybody get turned on to > checking out the "real Marley" because of this > "Sun Is Shining" BS. Reissues of Marley would > be a much smarter move; with new tracks, perhaps, > extensive liner notes, nice packaging, etc; that would appeal to > those who respect his vision and don't dig dance > remixes, plus, if marketed and promoted properly, > might draw in some new people to marley's music > who aren't familiar with it. While it's the capitalist > way to aim for the lowest common denominator, it's > truly condescending to aim low "just in case people > might not get it". Heck, progress only comes from > those who aim higher! Columbia did a great > job with the Panthalassa reworks of Miles Davis, > showing that if you really want to do this, it *can* > be done tastefully. L. Hill and some others have > covered Marley material tastefully too. But to > slap a Marley vocal onto a made-in-a-minute > filterhouse loop just for the sake of sales/exposure/ > whatever, is not doing Marley or the label any > favors in the longterm. Seems like there was a huge > absence of thought behind that remix. Hope it > isn't a harbinger of things to come. As I said before, > leave Bob Marley alone. Island and Palm Pictures > and Rykodisc really need to *think harder* on this > one. My .02 > Andrew Duke > > thomas m weibrecht wrote: > > > On Tue, 07 Dec 1999 10:31:47 -0400 xxxxxxxxx@xx.xxxxxxxxx.xx (Andrew > > Duke) writes: > > > Yesterday, I was assuming Phil was alluding to the blasphemous > > > "filter house-y" remixes of Bob Marley's "Sun Is Shining" > > > that are currently doing the rounds on that label. Geez, > > > leave poor Bob alone. Andrew Duke > > > > > > > im listening to this abomination right now and ur right on the > > money...but it still isnt worse than the cleopatra marley remixes > > abortion... > > > > tom w >> -- ***be sure to check out the 1999 Fundraising Auction for CKDU on the Cognition site*** Cognition/Andrew Duke's In The Mix mailto:xxxxxxxxx@xxxxxx.xx http://techno.ca/cognition 1096 Queen St #123 Halifax NS Canada B3H 2R9