> Maybe it's fine time to start understanding the there are artists whose bread > and butter is > "composed" music and there are artists whose bread and > butter is "remixes", and there are > artists who do both.
And just for the record I have no beef any of that-- heavy sampling, inspiration, remaking tracks, (Carl's e2-e4 example, what KDJ did with Chic on "I can't kick this feeling") etc. Where I think it gets cheap and 'below the best' is where you have a blatant rip-off that intends to sound almost exactly like the original with no credit (recognition and/or monetary) to the person who did the first one. In these cases I believe it is the rip-offers ultimate goal to cash in on something that was on an impendent release (thus rarely exposed on any commercial level to the 'clubbing masses'). Most kids hear the remake, most probably have little to no awareness that a previous (and usually better) version ever existed, and an imitator gets rich off an innovators art. For example, Sony's so-called "tone-by-tone" rip-off of Rolando's Jaguar that caused a similar uproar. Anyone recall the cover version of Tour D'France that was on that K-tel Break dance LP by "10 Speed"? LOL... I think Kraftwerk got the proper credit though? The question is did they get paid.. ha ha Maybe next he'll do a version of Numbers, just play the exact Kraftwerk track, but just filter all the words. Just think it'll be huge at Cream... ;) Okay okay I fear I've already said way to much on this... Cheers, Matt MacQueen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
