sexyback/billy jean remix
- Thread starter sirdj
- Start date
Try this:
http://athena.divshare.com/launch.php?f=671501&s=edb
By the way, to google songs like this, use the term mashup as opposed to remix. You'll probably find it easier.
http://athena.divshare.com/launch.php?f=671501&s=edb
By the way, to google songs like this, use the term mashup as opposed to remix. You'll probably find it easier.
I guess the ol' Kid still has the ear 
http://www.ourdjtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1243&highlight=songs
http://www.ourdjtalk.com/showthread.php?t=1243&highlight=songs
For some reason, I just can't seem to "hear" that particular mashup in my head. I mean really now - SexyBack is 117 to 125 bpm....and Billie Jean is 106 bpm.......it just doesnt sound like it would physically work........the tempo isnt even close.
I haven't heard the song of course, but now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I don't want to.
I haven't heard the song of course, but now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure I don't want to.
I would suggest letting Sexy Back die it's natural death. (lol)
I hate mash-ups and sampling in general, but I have heard some good ones. Remixing is a better way to revive an old song. Some songs need to be punched up.
You can't make a crap sandwich taste better by making it with two kinds of crap.
I am a huge fan of well done mashes, unfortunately, this was not one of them. There are some really good ones out there though.
I hate mash-ups and sampling in general, but I have heard some good ones. Remixing is a better way to revive an old song. Some songs need to be punched up.
You can't make a crap sandwich taste better by making it with two kinds of crap.
A properly done mash is different than a remix, in that a remix takes the elements of a song and changes them around to freshen up the sound of the song, whereas a mashup will take elements of several songs to create a new product entirely, hopefully surpassing all of the original songs to create a new piece of art...example, mixing an Cure song with a Korn song to create something unrecognizable, better than either. I have a mash of Sexyback laid over She Wants Revenge that is very good. Sweet Home Country Grammar is another great example.
When they are crap they are crap, but there are so many good ones.
Actually, Sexyback is a constant 117.1 BPM for the entire song (thanks to the electronic drummer), and Billie Jean goes from 116.9 (beg) to 117.3 BPM (end), so they beat mix very well!
I'm not a fan of either remixes or mashups, so I can't comment on that aspect.
Liaten to the mash up of " I like the way you move" (Bodyrockers)with "I like to Move it" (Reel to reel) for an example of a great mash-up
At my school dance last night, because of this thread, I played Sexy Back and then I mixed in Billie Jean, lost about 1/2 the crowd, but the others dug it and moonwalked and everything....
Thanks for the definition, but I don't believe I mentioned not knowing the difference.
It's just my personal opinion, but...
I like the art of "remixing" a song. Extending a good song that was originally too short is great. Punching up the beats of an existing track or making a dance cut out of a ballad is creative. It still preserves the song's identity.
I don't like most "mashups" because they are not usually thought out well. Mixing two tracks just because the BPM are similar is not a good formula.
I despise "sampling". IMO, artists that sample are lazy and looking for a quick buck. It's like.. "Hey, your song sucks, but I can use your hook for my song or to rap over." For example, Rapper's Delight would probably still have charted without the use of Chic's hook. Etc, etc. When the listeners are ready for a certain kind of music, that music will succeed. I just believe it should do so on it's own merits. These Frankensteins should put down the platters and pick up an actual instrument.
Thanks, that's the end of my rant. It's been awhile since I had a good one.
