A jargon failure
“Remix” means two completely different things:
1. To mix down a song for the second time.
2. To make a new work by creatively combining elements of a different song.
Unfortunately, it’s not even always clear from context what you mean. I propose we coin a new term for one of the definitions. Suggestions?
April 29th, 2008 at 10:18 am
I think you’re reaching a bit here. In most (if not all) cases, context will sort this out! No ambiguity whatsoever.
Let’s conveniently forget the time I got you that mixer! Tee hee
May 1st, 2008 at 10:52 am
The conventional meaning of the term ‘Re-mix’ is when an electronic artist uses elements from a recording for a new composition.
The actual meaning is simply to do the ‘mixing’ stage of production again with the intention of making it better.
It’s one of those things where if you have to make a distinction for someone, then they probably don’t know the actual meaning, and are speaking in a “common” tounge.
Those of us who are pretentious enough to claim to use the actual meaning are doomed to a life of solitude.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:47 pm
The one case where I actually run into confusion is when I’ve engineered a song for someone else. Then when I say “I want to remix this” it’s ambiguous.
@Aaron: If you use claim the legitimate meaning of “remix” is definition 1 (and I agree it *should* be, but you can’t fight language trends) what term do you use for definition 2?