LETTER OF THE MONTH
Mar 1, 2006 12:00 PM
FOR THE RECORD
I am an avid reader of your magazine and a student at Full Sail, going for my recording-arts degree. I have this problem, one that I have been trying to correct for some time now. In this music community of ours, the word “producer” has been thrown around very loosely. People think that just because they can make a beat, they are automatically eligible to be a producer. This is not the case. A producer is responsible for the entire creative process. They are responsible for getting a project done on time and within budget.
In a session, the producer is given music and money and must then hire musicians and engineers and book a studio to get the music recorded. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but I have yet to see Kanye West or Pharrell Williams handle all these responsibilities. No disrespect to them — they are awesome “producers.” But today's producers are really musicians, composers and programmers. If you want to know what a real producer is, look up Quincy Jones, who produced Michael Jackson's Off the Wall and Thriller albums. But he didn't compose the music or make any beats for the albums, did he? My point is that just because you carry around an MPC all day doesn't make you a producer.
Miguel Peguero
Winter Park, Fla.
For sending in this month's winning letter, Miguel Peguero wins his own DrumCore Deluxe — including DrummerPack expansion packs — ($499) drum-loop software instrument. If you send in the most inspired correspondence next month — or simply the letter we like the best — you will win DrumCore, too. All you have to do is send an e-mail to remixeditorial@primediabusiness.com. Please include your full mailing address.
NOT JUST A PRETTY FACE
Enough of the celebrity glamour shots already. I understand that image does count for something in the music industry, but your magazine is supposed to be “devoted to keeping readers up-to-date on producing groundbreaking music,” according to your site (http://remixmag.com/about).
If that mission statement is outdated, than maybe you could write a new one that includes something about current fashion trends. You could even start a column with topics like, “To mousse or to gel? That is the question.” I don't have an interest in reading articles about that in a music-production magazine, and I doubt many of your readers do. In the January 2006 issue, there is more than seven times the page space devoted to Pharrell Williams' face, clothing and accessories than to his music gear. The articles are about music gear and production techniques, and the image content should reflect that. I'm not saying that 100 percent of the articles are laden with glamour shots, but too many are. I'd get more ideas about setting up my gear and studio space from seeing a full size picture of someone else's gear rack or studio setup than an up-close-and-personal facial shot. Thanks for an otherwise solid magazine.
Steve S
Denton, Texas
YAY FOR DIGITAL!
You should have seen the look of surprise and excitement on my face as I noticed that you have included a new “Digital DJ” section in Remix for 2006. I felt like a little kid ready to unwrap Christmas gifts.
I am a digital DJ, aka a “lap jockey,” who runs a mobile DJ business using only digital media, most notably Traktor DJ Studio 3.0 and the Hercules DJ Console. It's amazing to see the infinite possibilities available to DJs now, and I think you guys are right on the pulse of what's going on with DJing. Whenever I play out, I almost always get that one person who can't believe that DJs can use a laptop and software to run a party — no more turnatables or even CD players. I always tell them, “Wait about five years. This won't be so uncommon then.”
I'd like to personally welcome Mr. Ean Golden to the highly anticipated section of Remix magazine that is “Digital DJ.” I look forward to learning more about techniques and hearing about the latest technology available to the Digital DJ. But most importantly, I look forward to the walls of ignorance this section will surely break down as digital DJing becomes more accepted and appreciated.
Jim Casso
Berlin, Conn.
COUGH, HACK, COUGH
I have been a faithful reader of your magazine since day one, first edition. This letter is in response to an ad you guys ran in the February 2006 issue of Remix. As I was doing my usual first glance at this month's edition, I was surprised to see what I thought was a misprinted cigarette ad. I had to flip back because I thought I was seeing things. I know smoking, drinking and club life might all go together, but this ad seemed so outta place. I don't think we buy your magazine to see such nonsense ads.
I don't and will never support the nicotine industry. They have enough loyal supporters without you running ads and taking up valuable space, and I don't think that a technical magazine such as yours deserves to be littered with junk ads or campaigns like these. Ad space in your magazine should be reserved for hardware, software, music conferences and anything music. I know that ad spaces make money, and it's about the mighty dollar, but when you sell spaces in your magazine, remember your soul. Please don't let the tobacco giants invade your limited space in this great magazine.
André Delegal
via e-mail
André — We couldn't bring you this magazine every month without the support of our advertisers, including those outside of the music industry. Also, our surveys show that Remix readers are old enough to make their own life choices. But we regret offending you and hope you'll continue to read Remix. — The Editors
HOMOGENEOUS ART
I just wanted to comment on how much I enjoyed reading the February 2006 “Editor's Note.” I agree with the whole point of “focusing so much on one thing” because life is a balance, and too much or little of something isn't always the best.Nowadays, it does seem that there is a lot of recycled music out there. The intent for most groups is to emulate other groups already out there because, for the time being, that formula seems to work.
It makes me think of the downfall of MTV. In the beginning, it was new, zesty and happening. Then it started appealing to the demographics. By doing so, it allowed the viewers to shape the programming when many of the viewers are clueless as to what they really like. MTV focused so much on pleasing its demographic, that it lost the plot.
Jen Abbott
Portage, Ind.
| Want to use this article? Click here for options! |  |
