|
Post by autodidact97 on Nov 11, 2014 16:36:03 GMT -5
dd.no was a great site when it came to mp3s. it was shut down coz he received legal threats. end of story. we weren't supposed to know the existence of the demos from 2003 but we did, These demos outtakes, had they been released , they would have been available ages ago on some online store or on record shops w/ the Capitol/sony/whatever label on it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 11, 2014 22:04:50 GMT -5
Sorry pocketdemon I don't agree with your reasoning, but of course, this is my opinion and as valid as yours. To my mind an official track is: 1) one that has either been created by the band e.g. demo, album version, alternative version. 2) one that has been commissioned by either the band or label, e.g. remix. For #2) to be valid, DD or the label has to pay someone or ask someone to remix a track. Not all the DJ Service Mixes are of this type. As I understand it, the service provides DJs with multi-tracks for DJs to produce remixes for sets etc. I suppose the grey area comes from a remixer who has been commissioned to do a track and then have the track rejected by the band for released on their singles. Still official but unreleased. I suppose some remixers find a home for it on CDs like DMC etc, thus where the "grey area" comes into it and things get confusing. Record companies can often give tracks to compilations by mistake, this also happened to Missing Persons in the 90s, when the unreleased song I'm The One was released without the bands knowledge. No one can argue that this isn't an official track! As for the ASWI, well....there is no remix here for a start, just editing and sampling. I seriously doubt whether these were ever been commissioned. Just my take on it.
There's no real argument at all Gabby - or rather i'm not trying to 'win' an argument... ...just give a different perspective & discuss things. i'm perfectly happy for us to leave the discussion still having alt opinions.
Looking things up then, accepting that it may not be 100% accurate, what Wiki's saying the current situation is (& seemingly things changed from the mid-90s), is that "All remix services are required to get the original record label or artists' permission to edit and release a track, but many bootleg services exist that do not." (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix_service)
So, whilst it doesn't answer the question about what the ASWi mixes are, it certainly means that there's at least official blessing for the legit services now - if not a way to utilise unreleased commissioned mixes.
Again though there's the problem that there isn't a known DJ Service release with these 2 tracks on - just the one Capitol promo tape.
So, even if it were actually a DJ Service that were used rather than a named remixer (which we don't know either way - again quality doesn't make things official or not), as it's not on anything else that's known about, it would suggest that Capitol actively requested this to be done by the service - so i don't actually see the difference in this situation between these & going to a named remixer.
Separately, thinking about your statement that "For #2) to be valid, DD or the label has to pay someone or ask someone to remix a track." - doesn't that make all of the NR competition remixes 'proper'?
Well, along with the label asking people to remix it, there should have been a reward... ...& my recollection is that the t&cs made the entries 'work for hire' - ie so that there were would be no royalties to any individual who submitted one if it were released or used in any form.
However, if that recollection is correct, that does form a contract between the label & anyone submitting - & 'work for hire' will almost certainly have been the same deal that every sleeve designer & producer & other official remixers & whatnot will have gotten throughout Duran's career...
...&, as we're obviously in agreement that not all commissioned remixes are released - so it would provisionally appear to be no different.
The only contrary argument i can think of is that, by not actually awarding the prize, this would negate the 'work for hire' clause - as it makes the contract formed under the t&cs of the comp invalid...
...though, whilst extremely unlikely, 'if' Sony & all their assets had been stolen by aliens having commissioned whoever to make official remixes, they then couldn't honour the contract & pay for them, but i assume we'd accept them as being 'proper'.
Naturally, whilst i don't believe anyone did, at least anyone who's remix was used 'could' then have attempted to sue Sony over the lack of a prize + any 3rd party who had infringed on the remixer's copyright by using it.
(Again, my belief is that it was a Sony comp, not a Duran one as such, so i'm not suggesting that the band themselves personally reneged on providing the prize or have any direct liability for there not being a winner or whatever.)
|
|
gabby
PAPER GOD
Posts: 1,883
|
Post by gabby on Nov 12, 2014 13:36:28 GMT -5
Sorry pocketdemon I don't agree with your reasoning, but of course, this is my opinion and as valid as yours. To my mind an official track is: 1) one that has either been created by the band e.g. demo, album version, alternative version. 2) one that has been commissioned by either the band or label, e.g. remix. For #2) to be valid, DD or the label has to pay someone or ask someone to remix a track. Not all the DJ Service Mixes are of this type. As I understand it, the service provides DJs with multi-tracks for DJs to produce remixes for sets etc. I suppose the grey area comes from a remixer who has been commissioned to do a track and then have the track rejected by the band for released on their singles. Still official but unreleased. I suppose some remixers find a home for it on CDs like DMC etc, thus where the "grey area" comes into it and things get confusing. Record companies can often give tracks to compilations by mistake, this also happened to Missing Persons in the 90s, when the unreleased song I'm The One was released without the bands knowledge. No one can argue that this isn't an official track! As for the ASWI, well....there is no remix here for a start, just editing and sampling. I seriously doubt whether these were ever been commissioned. Just my take on it.
There's no real argument at all Gabby - or rather i'm not trying to 'win' an argument... ...just give a different perspective & discuss things. i'm perfectly happy for us to leave the discussion still having alt opinions.
Looking things up then, accepting that it may not be 100% accurate, what Wiki's saying the current situation is (& seemingly things changed from the mid-90s), is that "All remix services are required to get the original record label or artists' permission to edit and release a track, but many bootleg services exist that do not." (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remix_service)
So, whilst it doesn't answer the question about what the ASWi mixes are, it certainly means that there's at least official blessing for the legit services now - if not a way to utilise unreleased commissioned mixes.
Again though there's the problem that there isn't a known DJ Service release with these 2 tracks on - just the one Capitol promo tape.
So, even if it were actually a DJ Service that were used rather than a named remixer (which we don't know either way - again quality doesn't make things official or not), as it's not on anything else that's known about, it would suggest that Capitol actively requested this to be done by the service - so i don't actually see the difference in this situation between these & going to a named remixer.
Separately, thinking about your statement that "For #2) to be valid, DD or the label has to pay someone or ask someone to remix a track." - doesn't that make all of the NR competition remixes 'proper'?
Well, along with the label asking people to remix it, there should have been a reward... ...& my recollection is that the t&cs made the entries 'work for hire' - ie so that there were would be no royalties to any individual who submitted one if it were released or used in any form.
However, if that recollection is correct, that does form a contract between the label & anyone submitting - & 'work for hire' will almost certainly have been the same deal that every sleeve designer & producer & other official remixers & whatnot will have gotten throughout Duran's career...
...&, as we're obviously in agreement that not all commissioned remixes are released - so it would provisionally appear to be no different.
The only contrary argument i can think of is that, by not actually awarding the prize, this would negate the 'work for hire' clause - as it makes the contract formed under the t&cs of the comp invalid...
...though, whilst extremely unlikely, 'if' Sony & all their assets had been stolen by aliens having commissioned whoever to make official remixes, they then couldn't honour the contract & pay for them, but i assume we'd accept them as being 'proper'.
Naturally, whilst i don't believe anyone did, at least anyone who's remix was used 'could' then have attempted to sue Sony over the lack of a prize + any 3rd party who had infringed on the remixer's copyright by using it.
(Again, my belief is that it was a Sony comp, not a Duran one as such, so i'm not suggesting that the band themselves personally reneged on providing the prize or have any direct liability for there not being a winner or whatever.) Hi PD, There's nothing more I can really add to this discussion other than to repeat my summary in my previous post. My opinions on this topic are long standing and of course, come down to personal preference. If a track doesn't fit the bill for me in terms of point 1) and 2) I made then I don't include it my DD audio folders. But that's just me. With things like fan mixes and competitions then an element of common sense comes into deciding the status of these I think. However, I think this is hard area to get a consensus on, as many people will have strong opinions on what's in and out. Cheers, Gabs.
|
|
|
Post by poptrash on Nov 13, 2014 6:13:59 GMT -5
Did anyone get this already? I believe everyone who has received the 'mispressing' with the same Serious version on both track 3 and 10 are going to get this soon as well: View AttachmentYep, got it today! Even the simple inlay is of great quality!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2014 10:32:45 GMT -5
Did anyone get this already? I believe everyone who has received the 'mispressing' with the same Serious version on both track 3 and 10 are going to get this soon as well: View AttachmentYep, got it today! Even the simple inlay is of great quality! Did you have to contact them? I'm still waiting for mine.
|
|
|
Post by poptrash on Nov 13, 2014 11:02:35 GMT -5
Nope, did not have to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2014 11:34:31 GMT -5
okay, thank you
|
|
|
Post by durandurannorway on Nov 13, 2014 12:36:49 GMT -5
I also got mine today! Asked for it yesterday, but it was already sent out! Very good service!!
|
|
oakey
PAPER GOD
Posts: 2,600
|
Post by oakey on Nov 13, 2014 12:50:21 GMT -5
I also got mine today! Asked for it yesterday, but it was already sent out! Very good service!! Same here. The House Mix is very 1990 indeed
|
|
ansgar
PAPER GOD
durancompilations.com 🥱 🤣
Posts: 1,715
|
Post by ansgar on Nov 13, 2014 14:34:41 GMT -5
Did anyone get this already? I believe everyone who has received the 'mispressing' with the same Serious version on both track 3 and 10 are going to get this soon as well: View AttachmentYep, got it today! Even the simple inlay is of great quality! Mine was also in the post today! Great!
|
|