TheMgnt@aol.com wrote:

...

Sorry, but you've confused the trees for the forest, i.e., you've missed the point.

...and yet you continue to refuse to answer the basic question, one which would clear things up to a point. What is it about THIS TRACK that classifies it TO YOU that it's a remix and not an original track with KLF Remix slapped on it. That's all I'm asking.

Try reading my post. <snip> ...A remix uses something of the source material and beyond that, who can say what it is? and THAT is exactly my point... <snip> Anything other than that is to argue a subjective point as if you have an objective handle on it. I have heard many remixes which are completely unrecognizable, but that doesn't make them something other than remixes. You can come up with any number of categories or new names or specific rules for what classifies these things, but outside of your personal preferences ('your' being generic and not directed at you personally) about what you like to call things, nothing has been violated and nothing is going to change about remixing. It seems like the very existence of this record demonstrates that what is called a 'remix' is not as objective a thing as one might like. And certainly, when one starts applying the adjective "proper" to the term, one is invoking some sort of pseudo-objectivity that only exists in the minds of those already convinced. When one suggests a "proper remix", one appeals to a standard of what something "ought" to be. And I see no justification for such a position outside of what someone or a group of someones likes. In other words, because you suggest what are the grounds of a 'proper' remix, doesn't make it so and it also doesn't make someone else's ideas of what constitutes such a thing wrong, but tha tis what such language suggests. It seems to me that simply mentioning that one prefers this kind of remix to that kind of remix might make for a more profitable dialogue, rather than trying to claim the definition as grounds itself, which is unsubstantiated in this case. I don't mind argument (as in debate) at all - I have fairly extensive background in Philosophy. It's just that most discussions of this nature (as I have stated more then once) tend to degenrate into chatter between those already convinced of one position or another and are more polarizing than anything else. I hope that clarifies my position. jeff