DJ Culture, but not the song

[Propertius]

On the off chance any other Petheads are as clueless as I was, I thought I'd mention how watching DJ clips on Facebook Reels has helped me understand 1990s PSB remixes for the first time.

I'd aways sort of imagined, for example, that DJ Pierre must have gone to a studio one day and decided to record four 8-minute loops on a drum machine with a handful of words sampled from Neil on the top. And maybe that is what he and other '90s remixers did, but the whole thing makes more sense to me now that I"ve seen how mixing equipment (even apart from a full studio setup) can be an "instrument" in its own right, with its own strengths and limitations. And seeing how the dance tracks of that era were *used*, as well as hearing them *in use*, clarifies what had baffled me since the '90s.

The remixes were so monotonous (to my suburban ears) because they had to be suitable for mixing into and matching other records being used in the clubs. Before club culture really exploded, it was enough to take a 7" version and tweak it a bit -- extending some sections, adding a few overdubs or new beats, but basically keeping the form of the song -- to make it more playable on a dance floor. By the early '90s, though, the music being played in the clubs or raves was quite specialized, even if it was part of a large genre like house, and all the more so if it was part of the one of the new emerging sub-genres. You couldn't just tweak "It's a sin" to fit that format.

There was a transitional period with the Boys' mixes between '89 and '91 or so, when they were still doing traditional '80s-style extended mixes, and even the outside remixers tried to make the existing songs work for new dance contexts. The DJ international mixes of "It's Alright" make sense as the kinds of things that could be made on turntables with just a few overdubs from an 808 or other relatively cheap equipment. Marshall Jefferson's "Being boring" mix stays close to the original. David Morales Behavior-era remixes, which always sounded cool, but a bit like demos to me, seem to involve some re-recording from his team as they remake the tracks to work better in the new context.

But by '93, the thing for remixers to do wasn't to try to dance-ify a pop PSB song but to record a new more or less generic dance track and mix parts of a PSB song into it -- often just snippets of Neil's vocals, and sometimes not even that. As long as the remixer was hot, though, the track might get mixed into some DJ's set, and I suppose that kept PSB connected to this burgeoning culture (having Morales, Danny Tenaglia, and others then go on to produce PSB originals obviously strengthened the ties).

I wasn't sure why a remixer who was basically making his own track would be happy to have it go out under another primary artist's name. But not only would a payday from a major record company probably have been nice even for a relatively successful club DJ at that point, they were also probably creating so many "remixes" on the fly at the club that mixing together a new track to turn into a PSB remix was perhaps only marginally more work. Real work, but work they were already doing anyway as part of their day job (or night job).

It also strikes me that the PSB club remix era only lasted about a decade, from '89 to '99 or so. After that there are generally fewer remixes (with some exceptions, like "Vocal," which is itself a callback to the rave era), and they start getting shorter and more similar to the original songs again. I presume this was because the Boys themselves were less interested in the newer and newer dance genres as they got older and the record companies were less willing to pay for a dozen remixes. The point of those mixes was to maintain some youthful, semi-underground cred, but today PSB's cred as national treasures / living legends is more important than being plugged in with the latest dance floor trends. That's another thing that comes through in the Reels clips, just how nostalgic the once cutting-edge '90s scene (and even later) now is.

All of this is surely old hat to most fans, but it's taken me until now to start to understand those '90s mixes, which I hated at the time but now feel a certain notalgic fondness toward myself. To be 15 and force oneself to listen to 20 sold minutes of DJ Pierre wild pitch dub beats was quite a learning experience, even if I had no idea where this stuff was coming from.

[andmaste]

Good considerations, great article.

[dbaseboy]

They did at times sound repetitive and monotonous, and guessing most were only played or listened to once or twice before being put away by even the most hardcore of fans. Yes, not quite the same as those glorious 80’s extended remixes in a way, yet in some way the dub mixes did lend a hand in showcasing the ‘club’ sound.

I understood but that’s because I was ‘in’ the club scene, and myself used to blend those often minimalist yet dub style tracks. You give a great story that hopefully inspires many fans to dig out those club mixes and appreciate the beauty of those underlying elements that may have evaded them originally.

[lalolalo]

I think this is old hat for fans that, as myself, were "in" the electronic music scene. So it was really obvious to us. But I understand it's really strange for the ones that enjoyed Pet shop boys in their living room or in clubs in their teen years and then suddenly started missing those old 12" extended.
But I think even though your post is really good and on point, IMO there's another side to it.
Not only djs started changing the soul of remixes to incorporate them on their sets, but they started to become the artist themselves.
When people talks about this issue (and you know petheads argue about this subject a lot!) I always remember a story a Disney head told about applicants for a cartoonist position. He said "Don't come to me with a lot of Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck drawings!!! I know how Donal Duck looks like! Come to me with your own drawings and a creative idea of how they can be applied to the Disney ecosystem".
And I always remember that because that's what I think most pop artists from the 90's onwards looked for in remixers. Do your own thing with my material. Don't mock me. Don't expand (or extend) on my stuff.
From 90's on, djs started being themselves the artist. And I think that's what pop artists want of course. Don't come with Left to my own devices with a couple hit hats added and 2 minutes of a drum sample (Which by the way is what 99.999999999% of bootleg remixes are). We hired you because we like your music and style, and we want to be adapted to it, included in it.

Whenever I was in clubs, I never wanted to hear the 12" mix of Left to my own devices, because most of the times the style of pet shop boys songs don't fit the mood or the beat. But I remember when I heard the first bits of Superchumbo's Minimal on a Richie Hawtin set, that was epic!!!! And when Deep dish played Se a vida e, to name a few. Man, what a party.

When djs and remixers go safe, I always feel scammed. They shouldn't get paid. that's why bootleg remixes will always be bootleg. Don't re do Always on my mind. I know (and love) how Always on my mind sounds like. Don't add a couple of synths and call yourself a producer.

[negative_0ne]

Marshall Jefferson's "Being boring" mix stays close to the original. David Morales Behavior-era remixes, which always sounded cool, but a bit like demos to me, seem to involve some re-recording from his team as they remake the tracks to work better in the new context.

i agree with most of what you said.

but this is completely wrong.

the only reason why i liked the being boring remix, was because it was completely different.
different tempo, different beats, different sounds.

i was into electronic music, so the 90s mixes didn't bother me.
a lot of my favorite mixers worked with them.

if you weren't into trance and electronica, then yeah, it would seem strange.

later
||| | || |
ne gative 1