Remix64 Vol 2

merman · Post by **merman** » 26/12/2003 - 11:44

To my mind, the relationship between the music and the story in the booklet (whether we are talking about Back in Time 3 or Remix64 v2) is important to the overall experience...

And as Markus Schneider said, listening to INTO ETERNITY is a "visual" thing as well as an audio thing. Markus Schneider's STORMLORD reminds me of "Duel of the Fates" from Star Wars episode 1 - conjuring up epic images of swordfights and struggle.

Right now I'm listening to "Odyssey", the definitive collection of Vangelis' music. That is a very "visual" album as well.

Jan Lund Thomsen · Post by **Jan Lund Thomsen** » 27/12/2003 - 18:36

Chris Abbott wrote:Heh, this ENTIRE paragraph could apply to Crystal Dreamscapes without modification (except the name of the Cd, obviously)! That tickles me slightly

Aye, reading Neils reply immediately got me thinking "Crystal Dreamscapes!"

When I had the pleasure of providing you with first impressions of the beta-tracks via ICQ many moons ago I didn't recall the SIDs or the games for one second. I listened to it as I would any other ambient album.

More power to Neil for going in this direction on R64v2. Fist2 is beyond words. Top job, Maestro Holler.

weblaus · Post by **weblaus** » 27/12/2003 - 21:39

Tas wrote:one word: RETRO! Remix64 v2 isn't RETRO! it's a fresh experience. If you want retro listen to the sids. Your associating the tracks with the games and it's original feel. THATS BAD! because remix64 isn't trying to give that type of feel.

...

Your words have actually underlined my fear on how i thought a small minority would have thought. The key to remix64 is not to look at it as a RETRO CD, but as a REMIX CD (in the true sense of the word). Don't think 80's, think 2000's.

I took the liberty to shorten your response to these two bits, as I think they sum up your points in the last part well.

I'll try to sum up my thoughts about this once again in one (seemingly big, oh boy) piece with the hope I'm getting my ideas across (potentially problematic at times due to English not being my mother language, ah well)...

I completely understand your idea about the album, but I fear we'll have to agree to disagree on the final outcome. I've listenened to it a few times over the last few days, and I feel confident to say that the musical work is very well done indeed. And while a lot of my initial problems with the chosen direction still stands, I've come to like a number of the songs - indeed I've certainly been a lot more disappointed by some C64-based albums that theoretically should have been much more to my liking.

But I can't help but feel like it would have been in a way more "honest" (for lack of a better word) that, if you don't want the album to be seen as retro in the sort of way most other C64 albums are, the work of all involved maybe should have been focused on doing wholly original songs?I'm sure the composers are easily talented enough to have their own ideas as well.

One thing I don't see is what being a remix has to do with it, since most other albums surely transport the original SIDs to the 2000's just as much. I don't think being more faithful to the original (which I guess is waht you're getting it) does neccessarily turn a remix into a retro experience - I'd like to point out most of Mahoney's output as a prime example (to me anyway) of achieving the best of both worlds, i.e. avoiding to completely get rid of the original's charme and still being a exciting fresh take.

As I said somewhere above, we'll most likely have to agree to disagree on all of this. I'd anyway still like to offer a few final thoughts on what I believe might have been slightly unfortunate in your aim to get the remix idea across: For one, I believe it probably would have been a good idea to not label the CD "remix64 vol. 2" since it's such a clear departure (to me, anyway) of the concept of the first disc. And finally, as I wrote in a previous posting, the cover artwork simply does scream "retro" at the viewer.

As for the chance of a vol. 3, I was aware that you're not planning to do one, but maybe someone else will or can? Didn't the reigns of the Immortal CDs change hands between volumes as well, so I guess it can be done successfully...

Post by **tas** » 28/12/2003 - 0:14

Weblaus...

I have to say you speak with dignified criticism, and are pointing out many areas where you feel maybe something isn't right. (Not to say i agree with you ofcourse). But credit for putting your ethics here...

But I can't help but feel like it would have been in a way more "honest" (for lack of a better word) that, if you don't want the album to be seen as retro in the sort of way most other C64 albums are, the work of all involved maybe should have been focused on doing wholly original songs?I'm sure the composers are easily talented enough to have their own ideas as well.

I kinda know where you coming from in a way here. The musicians used are indeed capable of doing their own work and indeed do so on a more regular basis. I think we've addressed the balance pretty well what we have actually done is kept the strong parts of all the sids and turned them around somehwat to create a more natural sound. If we kept in tune with the original ethos then we are going back in time somewhat with maybe remix64 v1 and bit1 or 2. The scene has matured since then i feel. And thats what remix64 v2 is about. it's a very mature CD, especially when you compaire what could be classed as a very fun CD which remix64 v1 is. The music on v2 is crossing the line between computer sound and Cinematic scores. Doing this you cannot keep with the original sid or it'd just come out as a jumbled mess of amaturish nature. Thats where the quality overall shines. You cannot have real cinematic scores based on a simple three channel melody. You do need to create sections of dynamic power or subtle flute sections. You cannot create that if you kept purely and strictly with the sid. it's just not possible.

One thing I don't see is what being a remix has to do with it, since most other albums surely transport the original SIDs to the 2000's just as much. I don't think being more faithful to the original (which I guess is waht you're getting it) does neccessarily turn a remix into a retro experience - I'd like to point out most of Mahoney's output as a prime example (to me anyway) of achieving the best of both worlds, i.e. avoiding to completely get rid of the original's charme and still being a exciting fresh take.

I'm a little confused here, as i think Mahoney's music is even more daring than remix64 v2. I too think Mahoney is very clever, but he's hardly compairable to the original sid, or at least no more so than v2. Infact the only difference to me from v2 and mahoney's work on RKO is two things. Style and quality (no offense to mahoney, i'm sure he knows what i mean).

As I said somewhere above, we'll most likely have to agree to disagree on all of this. I'd anyway still like to offer a few final thoughts on what I believe might have been slightly unfortunate in your aim to get the remix idea across: For one, I believe it probably would have been a good idea to not label the CD "remix64 vol. 2" since it's such a clear departure (to me, anyway) of the concept of the first disc. And finally, as I wrote in a previous posting, the cover artwork simply does scream "retro" at the viewer.

ahhh, now we are talking about branding. remix64 is the name of one of the three biggest c64 remixing sites (RKO/c64audio.com being the other two). We are talking about branding here and not idealism. I'll sell many more copies with remix64 v2 being associated with such a website (which in truth it very much is), plus remix64 v1 has created a enough interest and good reviews to be a significant interest to the second CD being called v2. By changing the name to something else we are creating a wider problem of generating the interest with has been shown in both the website and the first cd. The title Remix64 was never gonna be an issue has it has a strong brand behind it. Bit 3 was very different to bit 2 or 1, and thus i'm sure chris would agree here that it'd be very unwise to change a title name just for a change in style or quality.

The cover is screaming retro yes, cos it's aimed at the retro scene. We are talking about image again. Who buys a remix cd? an abba fan? not likely, how about a c64 fan? yes! very likely. Because someone is part of a retro scene, doesn't mean they can't appreciate the music on v2. The music is highly based on the sids. It's still about 65% pure. the 35% is worked on creating the picture of a cinematic experience. The likelyhood is that people outside the scene will also like it, but getting that message across is impossible. It is a remix CD though we have bent it to fit our quality standards and the picture we wanted to achieve, so i guess it is Retro, it's just not hardcore retro.

As for the chance of a vol. 3, I was aware that you're not planning to do one, but maybe someone else will or can? Didn't the reigns of the Immortal CDs change hands between volumes as well, so I guess it can be done successfully...

One of the main reasons with remix64 series and why there isn't gonna be another is that i doubt i can improve upon what has been done on v2 based on the current user base. Meaning: The current trend of music sales not just remix CD sales is rapidly decreasing. Based what i can figure if this decline keeps happening in the way it is, sales of remix CD will make such a project as remix64 impossible. You need to remember creating something like remix64 v2 costs significantly more money to make than a single artist CD. Until i see proof of an upturn which i doubt will ever happen, i will not pass on the series to another team unless i feel they can improve upon v2. So basically consider V2 the last ever!