These so called "remixes" of Elvis's classic songs are bullsh*t. Who wants to hear Heartbreak Hotel with a hip hop beat? Even if people do, these remixes take a great and original piece of art and distort the idea to something Elvis never wanted. Marty, can you help?
remi...@shmemixes.com wrote: > These so called "remixes" of Elvis's classic songs are > bullsh*t. Who wants to hear Heartbreak Hotel with a hip hop beat? > Even if people do, these remixes take a great and original piece of > art and distort the idea to something Elvis never wanted. > Marty, can you help?
I fully agree. The remix of " A Little Less Conversation" sounded like Elvis was in the back of a moving van. I simply wont buy the stuff.
> These so called "remixes" of Elvis's classic songs are > bullsh*t. Who wants to hear Heartbreak Hotel with a hip hop beat? > Even if people do, these remixes take a great and original piece of > art and distort the idea to something Elvis never wanted. > Marty, can you help?
Nothing I can do about it except agree with you.
If the fans don't buy it they won't continue to do it. Otherwise BMG is constantly devising ways to get y'all to pay for the same crap in a different package over and over again.
I understand where you're coming from, because I too love the originals. But I think remixing is a way to keep Elvis' legacy alive with the younger generation. Some of those remixes stirred interest in Elvis among the teens, and that intest lead many of them to his movies and original recordings. And they love Elvis. You have to move along with the times if you want to get radio play. Elvis was always ahead of his time and changed as he grew. As his career moved on, Elvis did too. Maybe if Elvis was alive they wouldn't be remixing his old hits, but I think if he was still recording he would be putting out more modern music, maybe even with a hiphop-type or modern day R&B beat -- but the bottom would always remain rock & roll. He paid respect to the songs that made him famous, but did not spend a whole of time doing it. He was more focused on new music and new sounds, always pushing the music to the limit. He was the ultimate entertainer, and would never have accepted pumping out repeat performances of the same material, performed the same way, year after year. He needed to move forward. Cher is another example of how to keep a career alive for decades -- always changing with the times but never losing her essence. As the greatest entertainer ever, I think Elvis would be able to do just about anything and it would sell, but he would always essentially be Elvis.
> entertainer, and would never have accepted pumping out repeat performances > of the same material, performed the same way, year after year. He needed to > move forward. > Cher is another example of how to keep a career alive for decades -- always > changing with the times but never losing her essence. As the greatest > entertainer ever, I think Elvis would be able to do just about anything and > it would sell, but he would always essentially be Elvis.
> Yvonne
That's all well and good, but Elvis is gone and his body of work is finished. He's not around to keep up with the new sounds. If he had new songs coming out, he could modify them to reflect the new sounds. To alter his old recordings is to tamper with and bastardize history.
The only parallel I can think of is Liberace, when he would play a Chopin nocturne, for example. He'd play the piece with all kinds of embellishments and add an orchestral background. All that, plus his crazy stage antics took away from Chopin's original simple and beautiful piece for solo piano. It might have been entertaining for some people, but he turned the music into something it was never intended to be. It cheapens the original.
> He was the ultimate > > entertainer, and would never have accepted pumping out repeat performances > > of the same material, performed the same way, year after year. He needed to > > move forward. > > Cher is another example of how to keep a career alive for decades -- always > > changing with the times but never losing her essence. As the greatest > > entertainer ever, I think Elvis would be able to do just about anything and > > it would sell, but he would always essentially be Elvis.
> > Yvonne
> That's all well and good, but Elvis is gone and his body of work is > finished. He's not around to keep up with the new sounds. If he had > new songs coming out, he could modify them to reflect the new sounds. > To alter his old recordings is to tamper with and bastardize history.
> The only parallel I can think of is Liberace, when he would play a > Chopin nocturne, for example. He'd play the piece with all kinds of > embellishments and add an orchestral background. All that, plus his > crazy stage antics took away from Chopin's original simple and > beautiful piece for solo piano. It might have been entertaining for > some people, but he turned the music into something it was never > intended to be. It cheapens the original.
> Chuck
> Chuck
I disagree. Do you feel the original of ALLC has been cheapened? Just curious. Jason~~
Chuck wrote: > (snip) > He was the ultimate > > entertainer, and would never have accepted pumping out repeat performances > > of the same material, performed the same way, year after year. He needed to > > move forward. > > Cher is another example of how to keep a career alive for decades -- always > > changing with the times but never losing her essence. As the greatest > > entertainer ever, I think Elvis would be able to do just about anything and > > it would sell, but he would always essentially be Elvis. > > Yvonne > That's all well and good, but Elvis is gone and his body of work is > finished. He's not around to keep up with the new sounds. If he had > new songs coming out, he could modify them to reflect the new sounds. > To alter his old recordings is to tamper with and bastardize history. > The only parallel I can think of is Liberace, when he would play a > Chopin nocturne, for example. He'd play the piece with all kinds of > embellishments and add an orchestral background. All that, plus his > crazy stage antics took away from Chopin's original simple and > beautiful piece for solo piano. It might have been entertaining for > some people, but he turned the music into something it was never > intended to be. It cheapens the original. > Chuck > Chuck
I disagree. Do you feel the original of ALLC has been cheapened? Just curious. Jason~~
I don't have strong feelings about that particular remix. It was a novelty and it was OK. But the gist of the post I was responding to said that the remixes keep Elvis' career alive and keep him current with the times. It is my opinion that if they continue to try to keep Elvis' career alive with a steady stream of remixes, his legacy will be cheapened.
