inTENtions Remix Event
skip
Home » Forums » Announcements » Remix History Chart

Remix History Chart

AT
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 8:17 AM
Just under the “uses samples from” list—-have I just missed this up to now or is it new? this is a great idea. Really nice to have all that info and links. Old or new i like it.
Subliminal
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 8:46 AM
I also noticed it only today. So it must be new or maybe we are getting old. ;-)
Pitx
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 10:29 AM
Take a look here. 50 artists in one metamix.
 
.
permalink   fourstones Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 1:57 PM
heh, I never counted. Is it really 50? Don’t you want to get a commercial license for THAT mix lol.
 
.
permalink   Loveshadow Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 5:11 PM
I thinks its great. Being someone with a very visual side i like to see who rather than read who. Its a very visual statement of what this sites about.

Some one should do screen grabs print them out and put them up in a posh gallery as new digital art ;-)
fourstones
admin
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 1:55 PM
This got checked in and turned on the ccM server quite by accident last night. Once I realized it was in and on I figured I’d let it fly. People have been asking for something like it for a while. This particular implementation was inspired by a conversation with Loveshadow.

I wouldn’t claim it’s the most complete feature on the site but I certainly don’t have the time to make any more tweaks to it.

spinmeister
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 3:29 PM
very cool and a nice visual.

UPDATE: I’m leaving my original post here, because of the response by LS below, but upon re-reading it, I realize that this post is nitpicking about the inherent limitations of attribution trees, rather than celebrating the significant addition this new tree really is to ccM (see my post further below). Sorry about that!

Original post:
———————————————————————————
However in licensing remixes one of the tricky issues is, that grandchild remixes are not necessarily derived from their grandparents, because the grandchild remix maybe only used parts that the parent introduced as new elements.

For example in my remix Unforgiven I used just TheJoe’s piano from TheJoe’s “Go With Me” and not a single snippet from “Go With It” by Mandyleigh Storm”.

On the other side of that same remixing parent tree the ancestry tree is cut off at Kaer Trouz’s vocal track, because she uploaded it as a separate upload (rather than a secondary file like TheJoe had done for his piano part above). KT’s pell was really a component of a remix of hers using a Loveshadow guitar track also uploaded as a separate file, but which in turn was originally used for a Loveshadow remix of a Jhony El Maalouf pell.

This is just to illustrate that a remixing attribution tree is pretty much impossible to do with technical means alone, therefore an attribution tree is a really interesting starting point to assist in research, but one can’t expect too much from it.
 
.
permalink   Loveshadow Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 5:01 PM
Licensing of a mix is often not based on the attribution. If an individual wants to do that they make contact and so a conversation happens to see who is in agreement. There is no other way.

A possible idea if someone was wanting to clarify the position of their remix is make that contact themselves ahead of the final attributed license. There would sill need to be be a discussion and things do change , but as i have experienced the haggling over who gets what and how it should go would be done.

There have been a couple of opportunities i have lost out on due to this problem.

I think the sample path of one mix is enough. The fact that Kaers vocal was reused means there is a separate path unique to each variation.

The `sample are used in’ feature opens into each branch of their own remix tree.
 
.
permalink   spinmeister Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 5:47 PM
I agree with you… kind of… I think :-)

by the way, Attribution is a license, too. Section “4. Restrictions” makes for interesting reading and I would not be surprised to find out that it’s widely violated outside of ccM.
Loveshadow
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 4:41 PM
I personally think its excellent.

My conversation with Fourstones was simply one of recognising the historical components of a remix and the people. Apparently its something that was here before so my thoughts were not that original.

Its always been something that you could do before but with a lot of reverse clicking.

The thinking was that when a remix that features a large component of another earlier work starts moving away from the original source, often casual listeners will credit perhaps a vocalist re mixer on their say piano skills not fully understanding how it has evolved from someone else’s piano abilities.

This new tab almost creates the remix band members and sleeve notes.

I also like the graphical element it injects into the remix page and cool to see the collected avatars

I like it and will use it i know.

The other fact is that for people who visit the site to listen causally or to search for stuff then its another clicky search feature. That may encourage greater use of the site in some way or the source parts if they dont happen to like me warbling all over them. :-)
spinmeister
.
permalink   Thu, May 28, 2009 @ 5:54 PM
I apologize for not having done this more clearly in my previous post:

I think the new tree is a wonderful mechanism to ensure multi-generation attribution is given on ccM. A big to VS for putting it in! And it provides a road map for contacting potential copyright holders if one should desire to license for a commercial purpose.

It may over-attribute a little, but I don’t think there’s any way to avoid that.