rainstick wrote:yeh, if they wanted to say it was a remix then it's a remix, if they want to say it's something else then it's something else... I certainly think it (and the thousands of other tracks that sample) are welcome to call themselves original tracks (although the composition contains samples)
i could make a whole track and use a bit of a vocal and call it a remix... and it'd be a remix.
off course everyone's welcome to their opinion, but there's no ' that's not a remix it doesn't sound enough like the original ' , at least not objectively.
By that Logic (ba dum tish), one could say Madonna is a country singer, David Guetta a Baroque-esque composer and Nicki Minaj a power ballad singer.
Genres and labels exist for a reason- to make different stylings of music easy to acquire. It's always good to break genre rules, and they'll always be evolving. Furthermore, only listening to one genre of music (and conversely, not listening to only one genre of music) is a bad idea, as there are plenty of great musical pieces under the entire realm of genres.
However, they're a necessity in that it makes it a lot easier for the music consumer to find what their particularly in the mood for at a time– somebody preparing a set for a dance floor won't need to wade through hours of classical music to find what they need, and somebody in the mood for some aggressive metal won't find themselves listening to Adele.
I'm all for giving the artist freedom, but if Lady Antebellum starts calling what she does Hip-hop, I'm not going to believe it. The whole point of labels and words for them is to define something as being within a set of rules or sharing similar characteristics to it.Anyways,
getting back to my original point– I was simply curious if the original poster intended to include a more remix like feel later on (including the full vocals for people to sing along, etc.) or if they merely intended to continue with this pretty awesome glitchy style throughout.