Originally posted by Eric J
Thanks! I'll be making an instrumental version of Not Over Yet very soon. I'll be sure to send all of you promos of it!
Wow, that's great news! Thanks Eric :D
Eric J
quote:
Originally posted by DJ RANN
Wow, that's great news! Thanks Eric :D
Check ur PM. :toocool:
dj_alfi
quote:
Originally posted by scorpradio
After all, it is in my opinion that DJ's remix a song for one of three reasons.
1: They were either moved and influenced enough to do so
2: They felt the song lacked something,whether dynamics or ambient textures or just plain lackluster
3: They get paid to do it.
fixed
dj_alfi
oh and there's nothing wrong in using midi files, not everyone can just listen to a melody and immediately know what notes are playing but can still make a banging remix.
Rodri Santos
actually if you skip the midi and get the melody by ear you are doing 3 things:
-Wasting your time
-Confusing the melody
-Training your ear (yay good thing!)
Lunar Phase 7
quote:
Originally posted by Rodri Santos
actually if you skip the midi and get the melody by ear you are doing 3 things:
-Wasting your time
-Confusing the melody
-Training your ear (yay good thing!)
Exactly.
Why spend a while listening to a melody that you'll get sick to off trying to get it perfect (if it's a tricky one) when in 2 seconds you can have it in your sequencer making a cool new patch for it.
If you wanna change the melody then and be creative, go ahead.
But stems for a laugh, utter joke tbh.
Make you own perc, bass, fx , synths, etc.
Even vox and Eric has shown.
Nemesis44
The Stems thing is a tricky one imo, depends on what you do with them. It also depends on the track, i.e. how much a particular stem identifies a track.
I agree that too many people just throw them together and virtually duplicate the track, but sometimes there is just an element in a track that truly defines it and it's what people recognise because it's just pure genius, it's still ultimately up to the remixer if they use it or not.
Sometimes I use them, sometimes I don't, but I think to rule out either method would hinder my creative process, if I think I can do a particular part of the track better then I create my own, if I think the original is good or at least, if I couldn't better it then I might keep it.
It's all about what is right for the track rather than being a black and white judgement based on principles for me at least.
That said, I fully appreciate someone who wants to do everything from scratch and recognise their talents for what they are with a certain degree of envy. :)
Cheers
Nem
Mad for Brad
depends on the type of remix. ALot of french house is sample based and having audio is rather important for the remix.The more info the better in my opinion. If you have certain requests, pick up the phone. Of course if you aren't paying for the remix and are instead splitting the royalties, then I suppose you have less control but most proper remixes are paid for and as a result you have a certain amount of input regarding what you want.
Rodri Santos
Check this:
Original
Remix
How to not do a remix. Video explanation in 5 minutes, easy and intuitive. Only 9.99$
Mad for Brad
although not technically a remix. hE sure knows how to take a ty song and make it better.
Haak
quote:
Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7
But stems for a laugh, utter joke tbh.
Sounds like you've never tried getting creative with samples. That's one of the most fun things about remixing IMO. Just playing around going nuts with samples from the original. Endless possibilites.
Subtle
quote:
Originally posted by Lunar Phase 7
But stems for a laugh, utter joke tbh.
Both please, and its called REMIXING for a reason.
