Simply random stuff

[barfle]

I suspect I may be alone here...but I prefer when a remix just tries to approximate the sound of the original mix rather than matching it perfectly...because that allows for the mix to be improved substantially instead of sounding like the original mix but in surround. That's revisionist practice though, so it's heresy! Of course, it all comes down to how tasteful it is. I won't ignore the revisionist mixes gone wrong...

I think a remix of a classic song or album ought to be recognizable and stir those old memories, but not have glaring differences.

Case in point: The original 45 of “Kind of a Drag” by The Buckinghams had a far lower mix of the horns than anything you can get these days. To me, that’s a mistake. There was also a reissue of “Love Potion #9” that added a few lines about “going back again for love potion #10.”

Why mess with perfection?

 

[mandrix]

I think a remix of a classic song or album ought to be recognizable and stir those old memories, but not have glaring differences.

Case in point: The original 45 of “Kind of a Drag” by The Buckinghams had a far lower mix of the horns than anything you can get these days. To me, that’s a mistake. There was also a reissue of “Love Potion #9” that added a few lines about “going back again for love potion #10.”

Why mess with perfection?

Oh man I remember The Buckinghams and for sure Kind Of A Drag. 60's baby!