Back in the early 8o's DMC were given the right to officially remix Bowie tracks in the UK generally in megamix with other artists bit like stars on 45. (always hated these in the 80,s) Technically these are promos for DJ use.
The Bowie only Megamix in 1990 (ideal for Changesbowie release) is documented on the site
Previously released on DMC DJ CDs and included here are "Lets Dance Retake Remake (Steve Franklin)" 4:23
"Rebel Rebel Once a Rebel (Rod Layman)" 5:45 also on 2004 12"DMC promo
"Ice Ice Baby Vanilla v Q&DB (Dakeyne)" 5:59 also on 2006 12"DMC promo
"Final Dance Ce Ce Peniston v DB (Dakeme)" also on 2003 12"DMC promo
Historically also included is the June 1984 (cassette only) remix (and listen out for unlisted "Shake it") "Queen v King Megamix Alan Coulthard 15:31 which has previously flown under the radar and works rather well.
"Jump They Say Brothers in Rhythm" is strangely included in its original form.
This contains new "Legacy Megamix (Rod Layman)" 14:54 (different tracks to above)
"Lets Dance Club Remix (Ben Liebrand)" 7:20
These may not be your scene (and some you could only enjoy if off your face in a nightclub with the right bass speakers) but many are fun. Importantly they are legal promos unlike the innumerable unofficial options around the world.
The right to remix these RCA and early 80s tracks in the DMC stables seems to have been given back in the day but once remixes were done in House by Bowie's Record companies this was not extended for later releases (Fame 90 aside) and barely a year goes by without Lets Dance or other early 80s classics being used in multiple artist Megamix by DMC (which is quite uninteresting to a collector but shows their ongoing dance potential) however the new releases are proper Bowie remixes.
I must admit to owning the DMC various artist Megamix that occurred on 12" during the 80s (where they belong as new releases) November 84 Mixes "Jean Genie-Lets Dance-Blue Jean". January 85 Mixes "Modern Love", September 85 Mixes "Lets Dance" December 85 Previews "Dancing in the Street" where they sit among some real contemporary cheese.
Thanks for that I'm a sucker for remixes, I even liked Club Bowie, which noone seems to enjoy, so I bough this blind, how bad can it be? If nothing else, I'm sure it's good music to drive to.
_________________ - "Do you indulge in any form of worship?"
- "Life. I love life, very much indeed." David Bowie interviewed by Russell Harty, 1973
Yes it has a place as some peoples guilty pleasure. Earliest DMC mixes placed him next to Kajagoogoo and new ones will go into Justin Bieber so wear your crash helmet while driving!!
This shows longevity of Bowie's music however with the first DMC tape using Lets Dance in a Megamix dating back to December 1983 they have had over 32 years to get it right!
Offline
ruud
Posted: 26th Feb 2016, 9:18 am
Site AdminPosts: 1209Location: UitgeestJoined: 27th Dec, 2006
Thanks for that, I may even be buying that to complete the collection
The Absolute Beginners entry has been listed for as long as this site exists!
Although these remixes aren’t illegal, I don’t think they should be described as official, authorised or any other word that suggests they’ve been approved by an artist or artist’s record label. DMC (Disco Mix Club) only has a remix license from the UK’s BPI and it’s not allowed to publish/sell or broadcast the music. Even DMC regularly uses the word “bootleg” to describe it’s output.
As you say no artistic input other than Legal agreement that the titles assigned can be remixed and distributed to DJs with BPI payment/agreement.
The site also sells official Downloads of original Bowie catalog with payment to BPI so the use of the term Bootleg is unwarranted.
Personally after this final flurry and the compilation they have released I will stop collecting ANY new remixes unless they are already in pipeline (Blackstar or unreleased tracks that Bowie was aware of).
This goes for samples or mashups by even the most established artists. Unless truly fantastic!
The site also sells official Downloads of original Bowie catalog with payment to BPI so the use of the term Bootleg is unwarranted.
Agreed that we shouldn't use the word bootleg in relation to officially sanctioned downloads, but it does appear to be the correct term for the remixes. It's even seen as a positive thing in Electronic Dance Music circles.
A remix of a song, almost exclusively in the electronic dance music genre, in which the remixing DJ uses an entire song or samples from a song in a remix without the explicit permission of the original artist. This is however considered an acceptable practice as nearly all EDM DJs care more about the music than they care about the money. Having someone remix your song, bootleg or not, is typically a sign of great respect and appreciation.
Still beg to differ in this area as these remixes can not be Bootleg as they have a licence of use.
Anyone using the term Bootleg for these, in a DJ or any context, is just trying to sell them as hard, edgy and urban to their crowd.
There are countless Bowie Bootleg remixes recorded in the world (some may be much better) but these are fully licensed and the artist through lawyers/record company has allowed mixing recording and limited distribution to occur. Even if 30 years ago when deal was made its longevity was not anticipated. This was a very open unexplicit explicit approval of the original artist.
The fact that there seems to be no control to ensure DJ only purchase is a legal matter the BPI might think about.
I doubt Bowie had much to do with the KRCW Golden Years remixes or chose DJs but these are not Bootlegs. It was "go out do your stuff and we will licence" (in this case of course on EMI).
Marketing an official item as Bootleg can have legs with white labels that are actually official (cool), Pallas Athena looking like a Boot etc. Iggy Pop has on numerous occasions released his own "Bootlegs"that are actually fully official.
If the royalties are agreed and settled and licensed and there is no Legal disagreement these are 100% official and can not be Bootlegs. Even if some Bootlegs are better and of more value to any fan/collector.
We also have past entries for DMC, Hot Tracks and Disconet which would now be deemed as Bootlegs.
If there is proof that this is not the original DMC and that it is not operating under legal license I will instantly agree with you.
Still beg to differ in this area as these remixes can not be Bootleg as they have a licence of use.
I didn’t say the remixes are illegal bootlegs, I’m only using a generally accepted term to emphasise that the remixes haven’t been approved by the artist. Personally, I think it’s an important point to consider when deciding if a remix should be included in an official discography.
I didn’t say the remixes are illegal bootlegs, I’m only using a generally accepted term to emphasise that the remixes haven’t been approved by the artist.
Understand but under this definition of a Bootleg you would include Velvet Goldmine in the 70s and the release in 82 of Rare that includes it.
Love You Till Tuesday Deram 84 contains some tracks mixed and mastered for release without consent.
In the cases above Bowie found he had sold the right to decide and received only the limited royalties his estranged management had set up. (This is nature of DMC contract and Bowie has previously endorsed remixing his material (especially in the 90s) ).
I understand point (I am not saying these releases are as valid or important as examples I give above and they are certainly tampered with a lot more) but Bootleg is best used in its true meaning rather than in loose definition or confusion could ensue.
Also the examples you provide of DMC "Bootlegs" are not Bowie releases and became legal releases under DMC. The material had previously come out as Bootleg but the original artist now got BPI payment for stuff they had previously had no income from. They are an Official release of past Bootlegs so the labeling by DMC might cause some confusion
An example of a Bowie Bootleg remix that became official (outside DMC contract) is Benny v Bowie. http://www.illustrated-db-discography.nl/12inch/dj.htm Early release was a Bootleg but tracks became official when contract for royalties arranged.
Understand but under this definition of a Bootleg you would include Velvet Goldmine in the 70s and the release in 82 of Rare that includes it.
Love You Till Tuesday Deram 84 contains some tracks mixed and mastered for release without consent.
No, you can’t take my words out of context and apply them to officially released material. I only posted a definition of “bootleg remixes” as created by EMD DJs without the explicit permission of the artist.
paleblinds wrote:
An example of a Bowie Bootleg remix that became official (outside DMC contract) is Benny v Bowie. http://www.illustrated-db-discography.nl/12inch/dj.htm Early release was a Bootleg but tracks became official when contract for royalties arranged.
Again we disagree. The Benassi remixes only became official when they were authorised for release by Bowie and/or his record label.
paleblinds wrote:
Bootleg is best used in its true meaning rather than in loose definition or confusion could ensue.
It clearly is confusing and I think we should probably just agree to disagree.
Again we disagree. The Benassi remixes only became official when they were authorised for release by Bowie and/or his record label.
Actually this was my point and we do not disagree it is just that under DMC the mixes are autherised by the record company even before they come out as long as the material used are the songs they have contract for. This is why there is no post 86 material (Fame 90 aside)remixed by them as these would be Bootlegs. Bootlegs because they do not have a contract that allows them to remix or distribute even to DJs.
However as you have suggested I should now rest my case and leave to all the administrators to decide how they wish to catalog them and accept that.
Either loose all remixes of these type from the site from the 80's onward, catalog as official or set up a bootleg but not really bootleg category.
Finally I am in danger of looking like I feel this output from DMC has my support artistically so please be assured that apart from a few bits of work I do not care from them.
There are a multiple number of DMC CD's with a quick exert of Bowie in a Mix with many other artists which I would recomend you do not document other than to acknowledge a multiple existence of this type of release. Vinyl and substantial Bowie music on a CD are more important.
I'm a sucker for remixes, I even liked Club Bowie, which noone seems to enjoy, so I bough this blind, how bad can it be?
