Just so no one thinks I'm not watching, I am, I just wanted to bump this a bit to remind you all that the deadline looms large. You've got two months exactly! So hurry up, because I'm still looking forward to this!
This is most likely true, very good point. And some artists might like adaptation more than creation. Maybe to the point where it actually makes sense to specialise in it? It's, of course, not wrong to have influences even in completely original compositions. From a business perspective it can even be desirable to give your listeners something that sounds vaguely familiar. Might help in gathering a larger audience a little sooner. But you may also end up being unfaithful to your own creative process/vision at that point. Depending on how idealistic each individual composer/arranger is, that may be a problem. Or maybe it won't.
I should also mention that there are many creative commons musicians that create original music and actively encourage remixing. Using open licenses to promote music, sometimes even allowing the free distribution of all (original, in this case) songs, as long as credit is given. And most of the time, within these communities, remixes are held in very high regard.
And that is absolutely fine. It's your personal decision. Many other people might not be happy about this, though. Maybe feeling disrespected, or rather, feeling like their (hard) work is being disrespected. I mean aside from this thread, in general. Even some really big musicians would probably "strongly resist" your decision, considering how remixes (or sampling) are almost baked into the foundation of several genres.
I personally think it's sad to see another ReMixer quit (my own personal opinion about your decision) but other than that, I pretty much respect it.
Can't speak for everyone, though, and do understand why many people got kinda mad at you. Your choice of words might have hurt some feelings and/or pride.
Another bit of personal advice (this time hopefully less broad and generic sounding), be proud of your ReMixes. I'd encourage that. Since they probably influenced who you are today and what you want to do with your musical career.
I agree with all of your points, and especially like this last part.
I've been thinking about a way to try to summarize this, and I think the easiest way to put it is that it's a matter of creation vs adaptation. Perhaps we're at a point where there will always be a little of each present in both, but the latter ultimately only exists because of the former. Therefore, no matter how much I may prefer a cover, I just can't place as much artistic value, both as a listener and as a writer, on it as I can on the band/composer's own ideas
Thank you, I take that as a compliment.
Interesting, my brother gave almost the exact same advice to me.
I personally don't think it's depressing. Actually, I think it's interesting. It obviously depends on everyone's personal point of view.
Let me give you some personal advice in exchange for yours.
Since one can learn a lot from remixing (and also covering) existing songs, even going as far as almost changing it up so much it may well be "original", it holds a lot of potential for musical growth. So going about it with creative, open thoughts may be the best course of action. Same goes for arrangements. Through arranging music, we can learn and grow into the kind of musician we truly want to be. Composing, of course, would be the next logical step. Sounds very generic, now that I actually wrote this. You all probably know this already. I also feel like someone wrote something similar before, probably several people.
Well, since this is what I basically told my younger brother when he was struggling, I'll leave it in.
And I admit, this is me being carefull because some of my favorite ReMixers posted comments in here, including you @AngelCityOutlaw, so this puts me in a kind of awkward position.
Especially considering the different opinions of many professional musicians. I mean, look at Trent Reznor, he gave an interview where he described how he felt about Johnny Cash covering "Hurt" (which I think was mentioned in this thread a few hours earlier). He described hearing another person sing one of his most personal songs as "very strange". Another description he gave was that it felt like "someone else kissing your girlfriend". He did feel honored about it, though.
And Johnny Cash definitely made that song his own. I like his cover, never even heard the original Nine Inch Nail song, but gotta still say, the original song obviously belongs to Trent Reznor.
This is NOT supposed to sound condescending or as dismal as it probably does. Quite the contrary actually. Like I said, I think all these different perspectives are very interesting. And I DO love cover songs, remixes, rearrangements, for me personally, it's about music in general. There are remixes and covers that I think are better than the originals. But does this objectively mean the remix (or cover) has more merit? That is something I don't know. Part of me wants to say: "Yes, definitely!", you know, in a kind of cheerful way, to encourage cooperation and more freedom for artistic fields... And then there's that other part of me... >_>
But no matter how you look at it, I definitely understand any kind of strong feeling people might have for or against the opinions and/or facts presented in this thread. And I accept pretty much all of them, keeping a more neutral, yet still kind of realistic approach to this topic. The most important thing is the craft itself, I suppose. The art.
This is a good post. Unfortunate you weren't here to make it earlier
Regarding your point about holding off on composing for fear of sounding similar to something already out there, never let that stop you. Especially where harmony is concerned, it's truly impossible to come up with something that hasn't been used before. But these are musical devices: chords, scales, structure, etc. are established tools of the trade that allow you to create an infinite variety of combinations, of which something — a tune — emerges that, despite being stylistically similar to something else, is the result of your unique utilization of the craft, and results in something that is purely the product of your work that they will know long after you're dead, is your tune when they hear it. It's like adoption vs biological child: Yeah, you can love the adopted one just as much and raise them as if they were your own, but at the end of the day they didn't come from your DNA.
Why some musicians, especially those who are composers themselves (and this site doesn't accept straight cover tunes), would rank this as being no different from and equal value to simply adapting another composer's piece to fit their style, is something I just don't understand and to be honest — find really depressing.