|
Whiteroom - The Whiteroom 2005 (Incl. Leama & Moor Remix) (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Zharen |
| Being a total Leama and Moor whore, I can not wait for the release. :) |
|
|
| DiMethGuy |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ian^
absolutely no need. the original was and no amount of re-releasing it is going to make it better. |
aingmen!!! I never for the life of me understood how people drooled over this track. Completely uninspired, BT ripoff, and yet people loved it. unreal. |
|
|
| carmatic |
| hm this sounds like andy and adam are saying 'hey guys thanks for playing our whiteroom track so much, and thank you for loving us so much... so yeah.... oh by the way, this is what we sound like right now' |
|
|
| Sand Leaper |
| quote: | Originally posted by DiMethGuy
aingmen!!! I never for the life of me understood how people drooled over this track. Completely uninspired, BT ripoff, and yet people loved it. unreal. |
For christ's sake, it's not a ripoff if you sample an artist and then get the proper clearance to use it.
I thought the original of this was decent when I first heard it, but I was of course unaware of the avalanche of hideous productions to come using the exact same formula. And seriously, a remake of a year old track? :wtf: |
|
|
| spc |
| this remix adds nothing spectacular to the original (which wasnt spectacular to begin with as well) |
|
|
| sigmanova |
| completely unnecessary. :whip: :whip: :whip: |
|
|
| Ek0nomik |
| quote: | Originally posted by sigmanova
completely unnecessary. :whip: :whip: :whip: |
Agreed. |
|
|
| tranceangel76 |
| give them a break. they were totally ripped off by the label that released it and have not made a penny from this. perhaps they're trying to make up some of their loss !! |
|
|
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceangel76
give them a break. they were totally ripped off by the label that released it and have not made a penny from this. perhaps they're trying to make up some of their loss !! |
in this day & age anybody who doesn't read the contract & know exactly what they're getting into before signing it doesn't deserve the money |
|
|
| tranceangel76 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ian
in this day & age anybody who doesn't read the contract & know exactly what they're getting into before signing it doesn't deserve the money |
FFS - how stupid do you sound. |
|
|
| Ian |
| quote: | Originally posted by tranceangel76
FFS - how stupid do you sound. |
Ok, let's do this again, and i'll talk extra slow so you can understand it properly.
1) song is made
2) song is sent to labels & ones wanting it will get in touch
3) contracts will be drawn up, these include the cut for the artists of any proceeds. Once signed, the artists are held to this. If they didn't get any monies from the release, the fact they either didn't read the contracts properly or they signed for way too low a cut comes back to haunt them, it's totally their fault, nobody holds a gun to their head forcing them to sign it.
4) Already woeful song gets rehashed because they want to make some money at last. This step would not be needed had they done step 3 properly.
Now if explaining this way doesn't help, I'm sure I can come up with a book with illiustrations (Pop up drawings by request) and have it narrated to you by a famous voice, tell you what, pick the voice & i'll see to it that they do it :) |
|
|
| aloep |
Oh god.
The original was bad enough. :nervous: |
|
|
|
|
