I am majorly confused. How can you re-edit a song without permission. I had a friend who used to do those old "ulti-mixes" things and from about 85' on they were legally forced to license everything. It's strange that they can do anything to a "Rick James" for example and then sale it, even if it's just hard quantizing.
Which leads me to my next question. What do you serious minded d.j.s think of these "fixed tempo" or quanitizing of live percussion music. Ja'Maul Redmond 1100 S. Tryon St. Suite 300, Charlotte, NC 28203 t: 704.343.9900 f:704.343.9999 www.perkinswill.com Perkins+Will. Ideas + buildings that honor the broader goals of society -----Original Message----- From: robin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 14, 2004 10:46 AM To: M : A : T : R : I : X Cc: 313 Org Subject: Re: (313) Fix004 > just gave a listen to the clips. the rick james ones: "cold blooded" > and > "ghetto life" sound exactly like the originals with nothing added to > them. > the prince track I recognized "controversy" was a pretty poor choppy > editing thing. I dont know what the second prince track was, but it > didnt seem to be remixed or edited at all either. so what is the "fix" > label all about? my guess is that these tracks are 'temponized' (fixed tempo to allow steadier mixing) and re-edited so that the structure is more suitable for mixing (and work better for some djs). there's quite a lot of this going on at the moment. re-edits are still quite a big thing as far as i can see. > merely bootlegging 80's tracks to vinyl? is this what people are > spending their money on now-a-days? i think i may have asked a similar question about the difference between an edit and a bootleg. i don't think the answer is that straightforward tho. i can see both sides (ie. 'yeah it's no different to bootlegging' and 'nah there's some creative input involved so it ain't a bootleg'). i think most re-edits though are done without permission. so make of that what you will. robin...
