I like doing remixes. I especially like remix contests, although I have no interest in entering them to win a t-shirt or free software. Instead, remix contests are a great way to get raw working material to inspire me. Using just the vocal track, I like to recreate the entire song into something new. The act of reinventing and reimagining someone else’s creation is interesting. It gives me a chance to experiment with different styles, and to get to know my production tools better. It also keeps my musical skills sharp, especially after long quiet periods when I don’t have much time to work on music.

Thinking about all this leads to this attempt to define my philosophy on remixes. In part this is also due to the time I’m spending working on a couple of remixes of Karsh Kale’s “Manifest.” I’ve been wondering why I do remixes, and this is an attempt to define my approach.

1. To work on a remix, there has to be something in the original song that inspires me. I have to feel moved in some way. The inspiration could come from something specific, like the lyrical content. Or, it could be something general like the ‘vibe’ of the song or the sound of the singer’s voice. Without that connection to the source material, I won’t do a remix. So in a sense, the decision to do a remix is inherently personal and selfish. Not a bad thing per se, because without that personal connection the remix would probably be crap.

2. I approach a remix as a complete reinvention of the original song. Thinking that I can somehow improve on someone else’s creation would be conceited. But, doing a remix gives me an opportunity to put a personal stamp on the original song. I suppose this is one reason I enjoy doing remixes — I never know where inspiration is going to take me. Because the only limitation is my own imagination, I am free to go wherever I want with the remix. In fact, there are times I won’t listen to the original song — I might focus just on the vocals alone and see what it inspires me to do. In reality, I will listen to the original track as a reference point to understand what’s happening with the melody and arrangement. But this serves just as a departure point for my own take on it. In most of the remixes I’ve done, the only remaining artifact from the source material is the vocal. In other words, I like to strip the song down to its most basic element — the voice — and rebuild it from scratch with my own melodies, rhythms, structure, textures and atmosphere. I like to think of this as a radical reimagining of a song’s potential.

3. I also like to think of a remix as a way of capturing the different personalities that often lurk in the original song. If I find enough layers of meaning and emotion in the song, it can move me to create different versions of the original. For instance, in the “Manifest” remixes I am working on, I hear two very different personalities: strident social commentary (thanks to MC Napoleon) and emotional longing (found in the Indian classical vocals). The two personalities are interwoven in the original song. I thought it might be interesting to unravel the threads and create two different versions that highlight the different aspects of the song. So, one of my versions brings Napoleon to the forefront, and has a rough and raw edge to it. The other version is softer, more contemplative, and prominently features the Indian vocals. I’m also thinking of a similar approach to some remixes I’m working on for Sharaab.

4. I don’t think of remixes in terms of genres. For a long time, remixes have been a way of extending the market appeal of a song by expanding into market niches and audience environments where the song might not be heard. For instance, house remixes of Top 40 artists give underground credibility to mainstream artists, and ensure that their tracks are heard by a broader swath of the general public than just commercial radio audiences. This explains why remixes are market-specific – the latest Janet Jackson single will have a house mix, rap mix, R&B mix, dancehall version etc, etc. The same goes for all forms of underground electronic music, where remixes are genre-specific, but are also more tuned to DJs needs for different mixes to suit different environments, times of night, etc. Thus you see floor-filler house and trance remixes of an original track on the A side, and dubby/chilled versions on the B side. All this makes marketing sense. The down side, though, is that the remix genre has gotten a bad reputation. A “remix” is often seen as the original song laid on top of a different beat. (I won’t even discuss the whole terribly cheesy remix industry in Bollywood; 99% of those remixes are utterly craptastic.) So I guess what I am saying is, when I do a remix, my goal is not to produce something that will work within a certain dance genre. I think if I started off the remix thinking “This is going to be a main room breaks mix with a trance feel” then the remix will be doomed from the start.

5. A remix is not a “mash up.” I’m tired of this word; it’s time to retire it from the English language. (I reserve the right to use it when I can’t think of a better word.) A mash-up is taking MIA’s “Pull Up the People” a capella vocal and laying it over the instrumental version of Amerie’s “One Thing.” That’s technically a mash-up, and that mash-up in particular is a pretty good one. Another mash-up overlays Nelly Furtado’s “I’m Like a Bird” with Asha Bhosle’s “Dil Cheez Kya Hai” from Umrao Jaan. The result is pretty horrifying, as you might imagine. In any case, you can’t label the mixing up of disparate audio elements into a new track a “remix.” At least not the way I define a remix: a radical, highly personal transformation of an existing. Specifically, a remix that consists of 100% new instrumentation, beats, melodies, arrangement and so forth is, really and truly, a bonafide remix. That’s the standard that I strive for in my remixes.

6. The last element of my remix philosophy is simple: if I get the source tracks for free, then I give away my remix to anyone and everyone interested, to freely share, copy and distribute. It usually takes me several hours or days to do a remix, with no financial gain when it’s done. I do all the production in my home studio, including the audio mastering. My time and effort is more than recouped by getting my sounds out there and hopefully gaining a bigger audience over time. After all, giving stuff away for free is the drug pusher’s pricing strategy: I’ll get you on the “comeback”, as Chris Rock said.