Above: “portishead – documentaire – 1998 (welcome to portishead)”, included in the resource selections below.

List of online resources and music selection for week 5 of Hip-Hop to Dubstep, taught during the summer of 2013 at The New School’s  Media Studies, Department of Communication. I will be releasing brief notes based on my class lectures in the near future. If interested in looking at the actual class webpage with all the weekly selections at once, feel free to peruse this link: http://navasse.net/NS/NCOM3039A/. My notes will not be available on the class webpage, only on each corresponding entry here on Remix Theory. Please note that links may become broken. If and when this happens, the best thing to do is to search for the source by name. And do let me know if anything is broken and I will look into it.

View:
Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

Week 5
Trip-Hop/Downtempo/Drum ‘n’ Bass
July 1 – July 5, 2013

Music Selection and Relevant Links:

The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode I – What is Drum and Bass?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EAV8L7wae_I
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode II – What is a Rave?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSC3plKDiZE
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode III – The Master of Ceremony
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxkdckYB7VY
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode IV – The Life of a DJ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOcQHyGKj-A
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode V – Making Music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LnfVPV4Ymo
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode VI – The Next Generation
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t_FTwpM-m2o
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode VII – The Future
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OpHbkvdpG0
The Drum and Bass Diaries: Episode VIII – The Love
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uNfg4w4v4w

The Bristol Sound
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V34aBj4txCc
MASSIVE ATTACK PORTISHEAD Bristol Academy, 19th February 2005
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WS8ghabeIGc
portishead – documentaire – 1998 (welcome to portishead)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rElcSg81Qgo

Roni Size – BBC 2 – The Works Documentary Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3lErrB_AVGQ
Roni Size – BBC 2 – The Works Documentary Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddhuq_cc1Q8

To undestand the process and history of sampling, view Nate Harrison’s
“Amen Break”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SaFTm2bcac
The Winstons – “Amen Brother”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxZuq57_bYM

The concept album (to be considered in relation to noise and the studio as a music instrument):
The Pet Sounds/Sgt. Pepper Connection-Part 1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cz4rHCRNy_U
The Pet Sounds/Sgt. Pepper Connection-Part 2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IU7fG_tQoPo

Trip-Hop/Downtempo Selection:

Double Dee and Steinski Lesson 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8Bkk4fwBHw
Double Dee and Steinski Lesson 2 (1984):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaFQX5_4qJw
Double Dee and Steinki Lesson 3 (1985):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4HEhOObGYw

Coldcut – “Say Kids What time is it?” (1987)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOlI-pi3Zug
Coldcut – “Beats and Pieces” (1987)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DyIQ2Nzcx_E
(Coldcut remixed Eric B & Rakim’s “Paid in Full” thanks to the recognition of the two tracks above. See week 4 for links that explain more about “Paid in full.”)
Coldcut was heavily influenced by the aesthetics of cut & paste as performed on the turntables by Grandmaster Flash on his well-known “Grandmaster
Flash’s Adventures on the Wheels of Steel” (1981)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXNzMVLqIHg

DJ Shadow – “Midnight in a Perfect World”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8FboDWxVuxc
JFB Midnight (Dj Shadow) Routine
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wgkzcid28ZU
Midnight In A Perfect World (Extended Version) – DJ Shadow
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWRekgV671c
DJ Shadow – Midnight In A Perfect World [Gab Remix]
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MxK6GzfhuTo

Massive Attack – Protection (1994)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mpmc8m87
kIc&list=PLE02D96538B2819D1
Mad Professor vs. Massive Attack – No Protection (1994)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3VhggpAgF8&list=PL-W4U8Ymet4oRlZyU62u22ZwW7lIvZ6h5

Massive Attack – “Thankful for what you’ve got” (1991)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcEeqFTx2_k
The above is a cover of Vaughn’s pharmacy no prescription original recording:
William De Vaughn – “Thankful for What You’ve Got”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDTXljIqxRE
William De Vaughn’s composition was recorded in various dance versions (currently not sure of proper authors of these remixes):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KFpaWVy-Ac
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZycUHTlfGpA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=778JCaw4eZ0
Remixed by Paul Oakenfold and Steve Osborne
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0H71Ps_1jU

Worth considering how Massive Attack’s cover gets remixed to fit the dialogue of a film (pay attention to how the verses get rearranged to complement the film):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lU4EnYbCHJM

Portishead – Dummy (1994)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6Rvde1YeLE
Portishead – Roseland New York City (Live)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFwnlCudeC0

Portishead – Numb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6rJn_TEu5Y
Portishead – Numb (remix)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VV8_BJQK8o

Portishead – “Sour Times”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7gutsi1uT4
Blondie – “Heart of Glass”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGU_4-5RaxU
Mashup – “Sour Glass” a mashup of Portishead “Sour Times” and Blondie’s “Heart of Glass”:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzqyZFHOcE0

Massive Attack and Portishead – Glorybox
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22kGEbIwmWY

Nightmares on Wax YouTube Music Selection from the Album Carboot Soul (1999):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvOBGKhd8wg&list=
RD02OfHlA_ipUp0

DJ Kicks’ Thievery Corporation (1999)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqTHBOd_H4E
Thievery Corporation Live at KCRW (2011)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfwPJhwh0Ew

Kruder and Dorfmeister (KD Sessions)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCU36y5utlw&list
=PLBF9F0CC9321D7F65
First song in the KD session above is a remix of Roni Size’s “Heroes”(1997) :
Roni Size “Heroes”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb7fQhz21OU

DJ Crush’s Strictly Turntablized (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkYNQHtjYWM

Tricky – “Aftermath” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWNOzFnYCI4
Tricky – Maxinquaye (Album, 1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8Xum7NrlEE&list=
PLBA6E68A26EBED593

Early Drum ‘n’ Bass (Jungle) Selection (note selection starts in the mid-nineties, just as Jungle is coming out of hardcore):

Shy FX & UK Apachi – Original nuttah (1994)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzbdBk6XQ6Y

Marvelous Cain – Hitman (1994)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZU_jg3e7Lso
Remix:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhBLcc7iVNQ
Arguably a popular intro to cut into a set. Note the influence of dancehall in this version. Also note the Amen Break: Marvelous Cain – “Hitman (Dream Team Mix)”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQvG21alkTA
Marvelous Cain – “Jump Up” (1994)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n45a1p3tryE

DJ Hype & Ganja Max (Feat MC Fats & DJ Daddy) – “Rinse Out” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GaX31WvdB-A

TDK – “Friday” (Circa mid-90s)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfOuAq3xXKk

Splash – “Babylon” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prFk3bLlLMU

Rude Bwoy Monty – “Summer Sumting” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo3Fs_jonHY

Krome & Time – “Licence” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgDrr9fNA6U
(Note that it uses the splced amen break)
Krome & Time – “Ganja Man” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSsVAzNXqRo

Droppin’ Science – “Easy” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMU9-2oFi-U

Drum ‘n’ Bass Selection:

Goldie – Timeless (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gN0yH4UrXjI

Goldie – “What You Won’t Do for Love (Radio Edit)” (1998)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gfkbRQIX3NQ
Compare Goldie’s version with 2pac’s “Do For Love” (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=br6y-BmBmRU
Original by Bobby Caldwell – “What You Won’t Do for Love”(1978)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NQ-Bk63Hs8

Photek – Selections from Modus Operandi (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gpryFZtdM0A&list=
PLUdmMccuxH2HJrCrFvMUa6g2VlyPvOpTI
Photek – various selections
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qJKxaWb0_A&list=
RD021DIesf-xgz0
Photek – “Knitevision” (1998)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DIesf-xgz0

Roni Size & Reprazent – Selections from New Forms (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xb7fQhz21OU&list=
RD02CIU37LagLUM
Roni Size – “Watching Windows” (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZeGmKK8ZW0
Nuyorican Soul Remix of Roni Size’s “Watching Windows”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i59m7ppfvhk

DJ Die – “Slide Away” (1998)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_1vWWfe9OM4

Adam F – “Brand New Funk” (1998)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81L-4BodG6o

Ray Keith – “Do it” (1998)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zybnM4x_1Vo

Todd Terry – “Blackout” (1999)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IITE8aR5pqk
Todd Terry – Resolutions (1999)
http://www.discogs.com/Todd-Terry-
Resolutions/master/113293

Digital – “Far Out” (Remix) (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=71IAGWwU5uw

Ed Rush – Sabotage (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0PxjQD8AKs

Aphrodite Music Selection
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TPXeDp2zwSc&list=
PL2BE2C5E5AD1963BA

Kemistry & Storm, radio session (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qUPkUWhfOM

Jazz/Ambient Drum ‘n’ Bass Selection:

T. Power vs. MK Ultra – “Mutant Jazz” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ep6QiLXHLy0

LTJ Bukem – Logical Progressions (1996-2000)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xvcr8sCtlQ&list=
PL05E02CAEF38E1D6B

Cujo – “Traffic” (1997)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2KLl9Vf_Dg

Kosma – “Aeroboot” (2002)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IVnIdWiol8Q

Red Snapper – “Crusoe Takes a Trip” (1996)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cP2WedALHmQ

Drum ‘n’ Bass covers/versions worth of note:

Sade – “Sweetest Taboo”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcPc18SG6uA
Sweet Corner – “Sweetest Taboo”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6glc6egYdg

Beatles, “Come Together”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axb2sHpGwHQ
MC Olive, “Come Together” (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVkPYGZnLks

Inia Kamose – “Here Comes the Hotstepper”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qRMVL_kji40
Ini Kamose – “Here Comes the Hotstepper” (Booyaka Remix) (1995)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV3S4s3hLWs
The hip hop version takes the chorus from “Land of a Thousand Dances” by The Head Hunters (1965)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etlD8gF8okI
R & B version by Wilson Pickett was more popular (1966):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7fa4BfPQiKs

Image source: Basic.fm

Note: Very happy to be participating in the upcoming exhibition, ” Reuse Aloud.”  Information below.

Directly from the basic.fm blog:

Newcastle’s Tyneside Cinema and The NewBridge Project present Reuse Aloud, a month-long exhibition and radio broadcast throughout March 2013 featuring work from national and international artists, musicians and writers.

The project will be hosted in The NewBridge Project Space on New Bridge Street West and broadcast on Tyneside Cinema’s online radio station basic.fm as part of its digital arts programme, Pixel Palace.

Reuse Aloud is curated by Will Strong and Rosanna Skett and will examine the art of using old and existing compositions to make something new, and ask questions about originality in the digital age.

It will do this through an ambitious schedule of live and pre-recorded work with contributions from artists and musicians from across the globe, including critically acclaimed artists Frank Nora, Eduardo Navas and Natalia Skobeeva, DJs and mashup pioneers Z-trip and Girl Talk, and award-winning Canadian rap artist Baba Brinkman.

Throughout March a radio booth will be installed in the NewBridge Project Space and it will broadcast 24 hours a day on basic.fm.

Reuse Aloud will open to the public at 5pm on Friday 1 March with a preview event featuring new work from artists Andy Ingamells, Sam Christie, Jess Rose, Rachel Magdeburg and Joe Pochciol.

The project space will be open to the public Monday-Friday, 12noon–6pm throughout March and will culminate in a live 24-hour broadcast marathon starting at 6pm, Friday 29 March and running until 6pm, Saturday 30 March.

Regular updates about Reuse Aloud can be found at:
http://www.basic.fm/
www.thenewbridgeproject.com <http://www.thenewbridgeproject.com/>
http://www.facebook.com/events/117549618424766/

Calit2 has made available the panel discussion for the exhibition I curated, Three Junctures of Remix. Artists part of the panel include, in order of appearance, Giselle Beiguelman, Elisa Kreisinger, Mark Amerika, and Arcangel Constanini. The discussion ends with a 10 minute performance by Constanini with his own musical object named Phonotube.

Eduardo

Image from Cali2’s Flickr stream. From left to right: Mark Amerika, Giselle Beiguelman, Elisa Kreisinger, Arcangel Constantini, Trish Stone, and Eduardo Navas

The opening at Calit2 on January 17 was a complete success.  Many thanks to Jordan Crandall and the gallery committee for their support in the realization of the exhibition. A special thanks to Trish Stone and Hector Bracho and the entire Calit2 team for all their help.  It was truly a great experience.  The discussion panel, which took place just an hour before the official opening will be online very soon, in the meantime I want to point out that there are lots of great pictures on Flickr for anyone interested to view.

More Soon,

Eduardo

Date: January 17th, 2013
Time: 5p Panel; 6p Reception
Location: Calit2 Auditorium and gallery@calit2, Atkinson Hall, UC San Diego
Host: Jordan Crandall, Vis Arts and gallery@calit2

Guest Speaker: Eduardo Navas, Curator (pictured); Artwork by
Mark Amerika & Chad Mossholder, Giselle Beiguelman, Arcángel Constantini, Elisa Kreisinger

DESCRIPTION/ABSTRACT:
A panel discussion and reception mark the opening of Three Junctures of Remix, curated by Eduardo Navas. It runs Jan. 17 to March 15 in the gallery@calit2.

The exhibition THREE JUNCTURES OF REMIX features the art of Mark Amerika & Chad Mossholder, Arcángel Constantini, Giselle Beiguelman, and Elisa Kreisinger, a group of international artists who have explored and reflected on the implications of the creative act of remixing since the concept became popular beginning in the nineties. The art works crossover and explore three junctures (moments of production) of remix: the pre-digital/analog; the digital; and the post-digital which developed in chronological order, but after their initial manifestation, became intertwined and currently are often reintroduced in conjunction to inform the aesthetics of remix as a creative act in art practice. The exhibition is curated to reflect on how computing has enabled people to recombine pre-existing material with unprecedented efficiency that is relatively affordable just about everywhere information-based technology is widely used. This has affected how local and global communities view their cultural production, from politics to the arts.

(more…)

I’m very happy to have a contribution in the book Depletion Design: A Glossary of Network Ecologies, edited by Carolin Wiedemann and Zoenke Zehle; published by Institute of Network Cultures as part of their series Theory on Demand. The publication includes well-known theorists.  My contribution is a text titled “Remix[ing] Re/Appropriations” which was originally commissioned by the MEIAC for the exhibition Re/appropriations, curated by Gustavo Romano. I released it previously on Remix Theory.

Description of the publication (from xm:lab):

‘Depletion Design’ suggests that ideas of exhaustion cut across cultural, environmentalist, and political idioms and offers ways to explore the emergence of new material assemblages. Soenke Zehle and Carolin Wiedemann discuss Depletion Design with Marie-Luise Angerer, Jennifer Gabrys and David M. Berry, inviting tm13 participants into a collaborative reflection on the necessity to understand human beings as one species among others – constituted by interactions of media, organisms, weather patterns, ecosystems, thought patterns, cities, discourses, fashions, populations, brains, markets, dance nights and bacterial exchanges (Angerer); on the material leftovers of electronics as provocations  to think through and rework practices of material politics that may be less exploitative within our natural-cultural relationships (Gabrys); and on lines of flight from and through the computational – about expanding them into new ways of living beyond current limitations and towards new means of judgment and politics (Berry).

Depletion Design: A Glossary of Network Ecologies

Ed. Carolin Wiedemann & Soenke Zehle

Theory on Demand#8

Amsterdam: INC, 2012

We, or so we are told, are running out of time, of time to develop alternatives to a new politics of emergency, as constant crisis has exhausted the means of a politics of representation too slow for the state of exception, too ignorant of the distribution of political agency, too focused on the governability of financial architectures. But new forms of individual and collective agency already emerge, as we learn to live, love, work within the horizon of depletion, to ask what it means to sustain ourselves, each other, again. Of these and other knowledges so created, there can no longer be an encyclopedia; a glossary, perhaps.

Contributors: Marie-Luise Angerer (Cyborg), Franco ‘Bifo’ Berardi (Exhaustion, Soul Work), David M. Berry (On Terminality), Zach Blas (Queer Darkness), Drew S. Burk (Grey Ecology), Gabriella Coleman (Anonymous), Heidi Rae Cooley (Ecologies of Practice), Sebastian Deterding (Playful Technologies, Persuasive Design), Jennifer Gabrys (Natural History, Salvage), Johannes Grenzfurthner & Frank A. Schneider (Hackerspace), Eric Kluitenberg (Sustainable Immobility), Boyan Manchev (Disorganisation, Persistence), Lev Manovich (Software), Sonia Matos (Wicked Problems), Timothy Morton (Ecology without Nature), Jason W. Moore (Crisis), Anna Munster (Digital Embodiment), Eduardo Navas (Remix[ing] Re/Appropriations), Brett Neilson (Fracking), Sebastian Olma (Biopolitics, Creative Industries, Vitalism), Luciana Parisi (Algorithmic Architecture), Jussi Parikka (Dust Matter), Judith Revel (Common), Ned Rossiter (Dirt Research), Sean Smith (Information Bomb), Hito Steyerl (Spam of the Earth)

Publication (English Version): Theory on Demand

This text is published under a Creative Commons licence (Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike).

The RE/Mixed Media Festival, now in it’s 3rd year, is an annual celebration of collaborative art-making and creative appropriation. It’s the artists’ contribution to the ongoing conversation about remixing, mashups, copyright law, fair use, and the freedom of artists to access their culture in order to add to and build upon it.

The festival – which this year will take place at the Brooklyn Lyceum – a 3-floor 10,000 sq. ft. venue on the border of the Park Slope and Gowanus neighborhoods of Brooklyn – will feature performances, panel discussions, live musical collaborations, hip-hop, sampling, film & video, DIY, food and drink, DJs, technology, interactive installations, painting, sculpture, software, hacking, and much more!

Read more at KickStarter and Remixedmedia.org

Cover Design: Ludmil Trenkov

Remix Theory: The Aesthetics of Sampling can now be pre-ordered.  You can place your order on Amazon, Barnes and Nobles, Powell’sl Books, or another major online bookseller in your region, anywhere in the world.  The book is scheduled to be available in Europe in July, 2012 and in the U.S. in September/October of 2012.

The book will also be available electronically through university libraries that have subscriptions with Springer’s online service, Springerlink.  I encourage educators who find the book as a whole, or in part, of use for classes to consider the latter option to make the material available to students at an affordable price.

Anyone should be able to preview book chapters on Springerlink once the book is released everywhere.  If you would like a print copy for review, please send me, Eduardo Navas, an e-mail with your information and motivation for requesting a print version.

For all questions, please feel free to contact me at eduardo_at_navasse_dot_net.

Also, see the main entry on this book for the table of content and more information.

Below are selected excerpts from the book:

From Chapter One, Remix[ing] Sampling, page 11:

Before Remix is defined specifically in the late 1960s and ‘70s, it is necessary to trace its cultural development, which will clarify how Remix is informed by modernism and postmodernism at the beginning of the twenty-first century. For this reason, my aim in this chapter is to contextualize Remix’s theoretical framework. This will be done in two parts. The first consists of the three stages of mechanical reproduction, which set the ground for sampling to rise as a meta-activity in the second half of the twentieth century. The three stages are presented with the aim to understand how people engage with mechanical reproduction as media becomes more accessible for manipulation. […]The three stages are then linked to four stages of Remix, which overlap the second and third stage of mechanical reproduction.

From Chapter two, Remix[ing] Music, page 61:

To remix is to compose, and dub was the first stage where this possibility was seen not as an act that promoted genius, but as an act that questioned authorship, creativity, originality, and the economics that supported the discourse behind these terms as stable cultural forms. […] Repetition becomes the privileged mode of production, in which preexisting material is recycled towards new forms of representation. The potential behind this paradigm shift would not become evident until the second stage of Remix in New York City, where the principles explored in dub were further explored in what today is known as turntablism: the looping of small sections of records to create new beats—instrumental loops, on top of which MCs and rappers would freestyle, improvising rhymes. […]

From Chapter Three, Remix[ing] Theory, page 125:

Once the concept of sampling, as understood in music during the ‘70s and ‘80s, was introduced as an activity directly linked to remixing different elements beyond music (and eventually evolved into an influential discourse), appropriation and recycling as concepts changed at the beginning of the twenty-first century; they cannot be considered on the same terms prior to the development of machines specifically design for remixing. This would be equivalent to trying to understand the world in terms of representation prior to the photo camera. Once a specific technology is introduced it eventually develops a discourse that helps to shape cultural anxieties. Remix has done and is currently doing this to concepts of appropriation. Remix has changed how we look at the production of material in terms of combinations. This is what enables Remix to become an aesthetic, a discourse that, like a virus, can move through any cultural area and be progressive and regressive depending on the intentions of the people implementing its principles.

More excerpts available once the book is available.

Image: evaluating sliced visualizations of The Charleston Style remixes at the Vroom at Calit2. View larger image. View other Vroom images by cultvis on Flickr.

In previous posts I discussed how I used cultural analytics to examine video mashups. (See part 1 on the Charleston Mix, part 2 on Radiohead’s Lotus Flower, and part 3 on the Downfall parodies, and part 4, on sliced visualizations of all three case studies.) One thing that is difficult in this process is to view all images at once in order to make the observations that I have discussed so far.  This is when a large tiled screen is useful, such as the one available at the Vroom at Calit2, where the Software Studies Lab in San Diego is  based. Below are images that give an idea of how the large screen is useful to evaluate various images at once.

Image: wide view, 32 tiled-screen at the Vroom, Calit2. See larger image.

This image shows the thirty montage grid visualizations of my second case study, The Lotus Flower Parodies. The advantage in this case is that all thirty videos can be examined at once.  This is something that is impossible on a regular laptop or a large computer screen. Being able to compare images in large scale is not only useful to come up with detailed analysis, but also provides the ability to discuss one’s research with other colleagues.

Image: Tracy Cornish, a researcher at CRCA, points out a detail to a colleague of my Lotus Flower remixes grid visualization. See larger image.

Image: Detailed visualization of Thom Yorke Does the Macarena! See larger image.

Image: Sliced images of Lotus Flower remixes on top of montage grid visualizations. (See part 3 and part 4 my analysis for more on sliced images.)

One of the advantages of the tiled screen, in addition to viewing many images at once and in great detail, is the fact that the files don’t appear inside windows as they would on an average computer.  As the image above makes obvious, you can lay images next to each other, and on top of others, with no frame around them.  While this feature might appear not so important when first considered, I found that it provided me with a sense of immediacy.

Image: Todd Margolis, Technical Director at CRCA, examines grid-montage and sliced image visualizations of Lotus Flower Parodies. See larger image.

Image: alternate view of grid-montage and sliced image visualizations of Lotus Flower Parodies. See larger image.

Image: Todd Margolis, Technical Director at CRCA, examines grid-montage and sliced image visualizations of Lotus Flower Parodies. See larger image.

Image: detail of grid-montage visualization of Charleston Style remixes. See larger image.

Detail of sliced visualization of Downfall parodies. See larger image.

Image: sliced visuazlizations of the three case studies on top of Lev Manovich’s and Jeremy Douglass’s Time Magazine covers. See larger image.

Image: detail of Lev Manovich’s and Jeremy Douglass’s Time Magazine covers. See larger image.

Going back to my initial point, when considering a large amount of images, such as all Time Magazine covers,  it becomes evident how being able to view several images at once becomes an important part of visualization.

Image: alternate view of Lev Manovich’s and Jeremy Douglass’s Time Magazine covers. See larger image.

Image: Detail of sliced visualization of thirty video samples of Downfall remixes. See actual visualization below.

As part of my post doctoral research for The Department of Information Science and Media Studies at the University of Bergen, Norway, I am using cultural analytics techniques to analyze YouTube video remixes.  My research is done in collaboration with the Software Studies Lab at the University of California, San Diego. A big thank you to CRCA at Calit2 for providing a space for daily work during my stays in San Diego.

The following is an excerpt from an upcoming paper titled, “Modular Complexity and Remix: The Collapse of Time and Space into Search,” to be published in the peer review journal AnthroVision, Vol 1.1. A note will posted here, on Remix Theory, announcing when the complete paper is officially published.

The excerpt below is rather extensive for a blog post, but I find it necessary to share it in order to bring together elements discussed in previous posts on Remix and Cultural Analytics (see part 1 on the Charleston Mix, part 2 on Radiohead’s Lotus Flower, and part 3 on the Downfall parodies). The excerpt has been slightly edited to make direct reference to the previous postings, and therefore reads different from the version in the actual text, which makes reference to sections of the research paper where more extensive analysis is introduced. Consequently, in order for this post to make more sense, the previous three entries mentioned above should also be read.

The following excerpt references sliced visualizations of the three cases studies in order to analyze the patterns of remixing videos on YouTube. The reason for sharing part of my publication now is to bring together the observations made in previous postings, and to make evident how cultural analytics enables researchers invested in the digital humanities to examine cultural objects in new ways that were not possible prior to the digitalization process we have been experiencing for the last decades.

———–

To understand how a meme evolves based on the first remixes that a user may find can be evaluated by developing visualizations of the three cases studies that show the editing of the video footage over time.  To accomplish this, I took the frames of thirty videos of each meme and sliced them in order to examine the types of pattern the editing actually takes.  What we find is that with the Charleston Remixes the video footage stays practically the same except for a few remixes in which the footage of Leon and James dancing was used selectively as part of bigger projects.  “Mr. Scruff – Get a Move on | Charleston videoclip” is one of these exceptions, in which the video is re-edited to match the sound (see slice detail below).  Another is “Charleston & Lindy Hop Dance ReMix – iLLiFieD video.mix (Version),” (also see below).

Image: A two column slice visualization of the 29 of 30 remixes (one remix was omitted because the footage is not the same performance.  That video is not relevant to evaluate how the video footage of this meme is left intact).  For a full list of this visualization visit: https://remixtheory.net/remixAnalytics/ and select “Charleston Video Slices.” View large version of this image.

Image: this is a slice visualization of “The Charleston and Lindy Hop Dance Remix.”  When comparing this sliced image to other slices in the two-column visualization above, one can notice the selective process with which footage from the Charleston Style was used.   This video is much longer than the original footage, and has been compacted in order to show how the video was selectively edited.  To view this remix, visit http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=POupa2sW1UI&feature=player_embedded. This video was uploaded to YouTube on May2, 2009. View large version of this image.

Image: this is a slice visualization of “Mr. Scruff remix.”  When comparing the sliced image to the other slices in the two columns visualization above, one can notice how the same footage was edited repeatedly to match the beat and sections of the song. This video is much longer than the original footage, and has been compacted in order to show how the video was selectively edited.   Visit http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Bx5-itIA0pQ.   This video was uploaded to YouTube on January 10, 2008. View large version of this image.

Image: A two-column visualization of Lotus Flower Remixes.  The original video by Radiohead is on the top-left.  Most of the videos sliced in this sample were uploaded within the first two weeks after the original video was uploaded by Radiohead on February 16, 2011. For a full list of this visualization visit: https://remixtheory.net/remixAnalytics/ and select “Lotus Flower Video Slices.” View large version of this image.

In the Lotus Flower Remixes (See image above) we can note that the editing of the videos is quite diverse; the footage is remixed (heavily edited) to match the beat and the overall feel of the selected songs, with the very first videos.

The Downfall remixes (see figure below) consists of video footage that for the most part has been left intact. What is remixed is the fake translation of Hitler’s rant.  The subtitles for Hitler are sometimes in the middle of the screen, in others at the bottom; buy zyban in china sometimes the typeface is small, and at times large.  But in the end the video footage is left intact and the translations very much obey the rhythm of the original editing.

Image: A two-column visualization of The Downfall Parody remixes.  The original video with no subtitles is on the top-left.  Videos sliced in this sample were uploaded between 2007 and 2011.  At the moment it is not certain whether the 2007 upload was the first because many remixes have been taken down by YouTube.  For a full list of this visualization visit: https://remixtheory.net/remixAnalytics/ and select “Downfall Video Slices.” View large version of this image.

Image: Visualization of Downfall video, with proper English subtitles.  The thin horizontal white bars near the bottom of the frame are the subtitles.  To view this video visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bmkUlXp5sk&feature=related.   Some of the remixes present the subtitles in yellow. View large version of this image.

Image: visualization of “Hitler’s Reaction to the new Kiss album,” a video remix in which Hitler rants about the album’s title “Sonic Boom.”  The subtitles (the thin horizontal white bars) in this case move all over the frame.  To view this video visit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nwOLfppXhsk&feature=youtu.be. View large version of this image.

We can note in the three case studies that the approach of remixing is in part defined by the way the original remix or footage was produced.  With the Charleston Remixes, most contributions leave the video footage intact.  No major editing took place until September 2007, that is a year and four months after the first upload.  With the Lotus Flower Remixes, editing of the footage is done from the very beginning, while with the Downfall parodies, it does not place at all.  Why would this be?

Based on the diagrams (see the link “visualization of links” for each case study on the page remixAnalytics) and patterns of editing that I present, we can note that the later videos are in fact responses to previous productions.  In the Charleston Remixes, the video footage is left intact because it is intact in the first remix.  With Lotus Flower, the original footage by Radiohead is heavily edited, which gives remixers the license to immediately manipulate the footage in selective fashion—by omitting some parts of the footage while repeating others to match the selected songs.  With the Downfall remixes, the result is similar to the Charleston Remix: the footage is practically left alone because the meme demands that the basis of the meme be that only the text be remixed; therefore, the only major shift takes place with the placement of translations on the screen: sometimes on the middle, but for the most part at the bottom.  The only other shift we can notice with the subtitles is that they may crossover from one shot to the next based on the emphasis of the content that the remixer wants to make.  But none of the Charleston and Downfall videos are as heavily edited as the Lotus Flower remixes.  It is also worth noting that these are all selective remixes, which means that they all are dependent on a clear reference to the original source.[1]   If such reference is lost, then, the remix withers, and would become either a badly concocted reference, or simply a product on the verge of plagiarism.

One last element that needs to be considered, which apparently affects the production of the memes, as is also argued by a study on YouTube funded by Telefonica [2], and also supported by the research of Jean Burgess and Joshua Green [3] is that due to the viral emphasis on YouTube, online users are most likely to find an already remixed version of a video, and not the original if the remix has enjoyed more views.  The exception to this is Lotus Flower, for which YouTube apparently always offers the original video as part of possible selections, on the first page of all results.  This is likely because given Radiohead’s popularity, their YouTube channel has a large number of views.  For the Charleston, this is not always the case, as the original footage sometimes will not come up with certain video remixes.  For the Downfall meme, it is even more difficult to speculate how videos produced before 2007 affect users who currently search for the meme, because they are likely to find videos that are popular, but not necessarily the newest nor the oldest—but rather the most relevant based on the terms used for the search in relation to the number of views.

[1] For the full definition of the selective remix see “Selective and Reflexive Mashups.”

[2] Meeyoung Cha, Haewoon Kwak, Pablo Rodriguez, Yong-Yeol Ahn, and Sue Moon, “I Tube, You Tube, Everybody Tubes: Analyzing the World’s Largest User Generated Content Video System,” http://an.kaist.ac.kr/traces/papers/imc131-cha.pdf

[3] For Burgess and Green this is evident based on their assessment of the emphasis of presenting popular videos first, and the fact that YouTube members deliberately find ways to promote their videos to become as popular as possible. See Jean Burgess & Joshua Green, YouTube: Online Video and Participatory Culture (Cambridge: Polity, 2010), 74.