New live DVD/BD 'ARENA TOUR 2012 ~HLS~' March 8, last of five 15th anni. releases

[kendelle]

Evidently it seems that people don't realise that multiple posts about AB3 just means that some people are thinking about its possibility, not that there's 1 rabid fan here with 30 accounts just posting constantly so they have something to complain about when it doesn't happen lol

I'm waiting to see if anywhere else has the tour for cheaper as it's a lot to fork out to get the JPN code >_< If they'd said earlier that the codes would be in the OS presses as well I would've bought those, but I already had the first 2 paid for and in shipping process when I realised lol

I would love a 3 disc AB3 - while she hasn't really had any "hits" in recent years due to no singles, they could shove stuff onto 2 discs and rerecord ASFXX as a secret 3rd disc - that would be awesome!

[Didz-19]

Let's all of us wait. Okay.

[ayumimylove]

Maybe we will have a 15th album to the end of this year to close the 15th Anniversary. And maybe after that A Best 3 will come.

[Onton]

I see no problem for this 5 release.
Except people blaming Love and again... are minialbum instead of singles.

if u treat both of them single. it's just so normal to have it again on the album.

[kalikagai]

Originally Posted by Onton

Love and again... are minialbum instead of singles.

if u treat both of them single. it's just so normal to have it again on the album.

totally this

[relmy]

The problem is for people who do not buy singles because the material will be repeated. I was planning to buy LOVE and again due to them being minis. It is a clear misnaming for more profit.

That is the problem. It is not a hard idea to grasp. People will be angry if they've spent money.

[FoObY]

Originally Posted by relmy

The problem is for people who do not buy singles because the material will be repeated. I was planning to buy LOVE and again due to them being minis. It is a clear misnaming for more profit.

That is the problem. It is not a hard idea to grasp. People will be angry if they've spent money.

totally this

[kotora]

When AHS members see the 5th release is live DVD and BD,

[TeamAyu2004]

^ are they self covers... wouldnt it just be remixes?
or is it considered the same thing?

[njanjayrp]

Ayu did nail For My Dear... in 2009. The live ver. was way better than the original.

[TeamAyu2004]

i dont know... when it says remix, to me, that means anything that is different from the original mix... hence the 're'-mix.
lol.
personally I dont think an artist can cover themselves because they already did the song, they are just doing a different version of it, which makes it a remix, lol...
but this is just me. LOL

[Zeke.]

Originally Posted by TeamAyu2004

i dont know... when it says remix, to me, that means anything that is different from the original mix... hence the 're'-mix.
lol.
personally I dont think an artist can cover themselves because they already did the song, they are just doing a different version of it, which makes it a remix, lol...
but this is just me. LOL

From wikipedia:

In popular music, a cover version or cover song, or simply cover, is a new performance or recording of a contemporary or previously recorded, commercially released song or popular song.

By that definition, a self-cover seems like the right term to use.

[TeamAyu2004]

Originally Posted by Zeke.

From wikipedia:

By that definition, a self-cover seems like the right term to use.

thats nice. Anyone can look up a wiki article.

from the same article:

The term "cover" goes back decades when cover version originally described a rival version of a tune recorded to compete with the recently released (original) version.

I highly doubt they mean the same person.

never once dose the article mention self covers. So no... it does not help for that definition.

[Zeke.]

Originally Posted by TeamAyu2004

thats nice. Anyone can look up a wiki article.

from the same article:



I highly doubt they mean the same person.

never once dose the article mention self covers. So no... it does not help for that definition.

Lol, of course anyone can but I'm the one who did it.

No need to be like that. I don't see why the term "self-cover" is a big deal. Especially when Ayu's 10th anniversary versions weren't really "remixed" (for example, see Christina's 'Genie 2.0'). They just were beefed up a bit, but over-all it was the same song with a louder arrangement.

[TeamAyu2004]

Originally Posted by Zeke.

Lol, of course anyone can but I'm the one who did it.

No need to be like that. I don't see why the term "self-cover" is a big deal. Especially when Ayu's 10th anniversary versions weren't really "remixed" (for example, see Christina's 'Genie 2.0'). They just were beefed up a bit, but over-all it was the same song with a louder arrangement.

lol, i wasnt trying to be like anything... i was just pointing out (not to nicely, sorry) that anyone can look up a wiki article... I did and it just seems like from that definition that it doesnt need to be stated that covers are by different people.

and its not a big deal, I was just saying that I would call it a remix. and the Christina example is kind perfect to see that its not a cover because they are calling it something else... which kinda makes it a remix because they changed it... when it comes to remixes it doesnt matter how much they change it just matters if its different or not...

but this is just me.
It seems a ton of people think it can be called self covers, whateves... I just call them remixes.

[TeamAyu2004]

Oh! I thought you were saying Christina was a cover! Sorry... i must of read that wrong! lol.

As we were talking about this I was completely thinking... Can music have remakes? lol.. I would call them that before covers... but I dont know..
I know TV Shows and movies are remade... but music... I dont see why not. lol

[Delirium-Zer0]

*eyeroll*

"Covers" are by other people.
"Self-covers" (this is a common term used in j-pop by the way, "self-cover" albums are marketed as "self-cover" albums) are covers by the same person. (Hence the "self-" prefix. I don't even see how there's debate about this.)

A remix has only the instrumentation changed. A self-cover has the vocals changed, and usually the instrumentation changed also. A self-cover makes changes as though the artist, in their current form, is a different artist with different talents and artistic ideas and tastes. Which is kind of the truth. A self cover is usually useless if it's done only a year or so after the song originally came out because there's probably not gonna be much difference.

Here's a handy comparison chart:
A Song for XX "she shell REPRODUCTION" (remix) | A Song for XX "030213 Session #2" (self-cover)
Dearest "Depth nostalgic windmix" (remix) | Dearest "Acoustic Piano Version" (self-cover)
Endless sorrow "Natural Green dub mix" (remix) | Endless sorrow ~gone with the wind ver.~ (self-cover)
LOVE~Destiny~ "TODD'S LOVERS CONVERSION" (remix) | LOVE~Destiny~ (10th Anniversary Version) (self-cover)

I hope this makes it easy for everyone to understand so they can stop debating just for the sake of debating.

[TeamAyu2004]

Originally Posted by Delirium-Zer0

*eyeroll*

"Covers" are by other people.
"Self-covers" (this is a common term used in j-pop by the way, "self-cover" albums are marketed as "self-cover" albums) are covers by the same person. (Hence the "self-" prefix. I don't even see how there's debate about this.)

A remix has only the instrumentation changed. A self-cover has the vocals changed, and usually the instrumentation changed also. A self-cover makes changes as though the artist, in their current form, is a different artist with different talents and artistic ideas and tastes. Which is kind of the truth. A self cover is usually useless if it's done only a year or so after the song originally came out because there's probably not gonna be much difference.

Here's a handy comparison chart:
A Song for XX "she shell REPRODUCTION" (remix) | A Song for XX "030213 Session #2" (self-cover)
Dearest "Depth nostalgic windmix" (remix) | Dearest "Acoustic Piano Version" (self-cover)
Endless sorrow "Natural Green dub mix" (remix) | Endless sorrow ~gone with the wind ver.~ (self-cover)
LOVE~Destiny~ "TODD'S LOVERS CONVERSION" (remix) | LOVE~Destiny~ (10th Anniversary Version) (self-cover)

I hope this makes it easy for everyone to understand so they can stop debating just for the sake of debating.

we could have done without the eye roll.
Yet again, another example of different opinions. everything you mentioned as self covers for ayumi are remixes in my book. The titles say it all... most of them are different versions, that to me has nothing to do with the original, which makes it a remix.
Anything that is different from the original is a remix, i guess call it what it want, its still the same person doing a different version of their song, which in the end is a remix.

also, i would like to point out this nice little article about remixes on wiki:

A remix is a song that has been edited to sound different from the original version. The person who remixed it might have changed the pitch of the singers' voice, changed the tempo and speed and has made the song shorter or longer, or instead of hearing just one person singing they might have duplicated the voice to make it sound like two people are singing, or make the voice echo.

and

Remixes should not be confused with edits, which usually involve shortening a final stereo master for marketing or broadcasting purposes. Another distinction should be made between a remix and a cover. A remix song recombines audio pieces from a recording to create an altered version of the song. A cover is a recording of a song that was previously recorded by someone else.

[BlackSilence]

*reads a page or two* i thought this thread was about the release of the DVD?

[maikaru]

Originally Posted by TeamAyu2004

we could have done without the eye roll.
Yet again, another example of different opinions. everything you mentioned as self covers for ayumi are remixes in my book. The titles say it all... most of them are different versions, that to me has nothing to do with the original, which makes it a remix.
Anything that is different from the original is a remix, i guess call it what it want, its still the same person doing a different version of their song, which in the end is a remix.

also, i would like to point out this nice little article about remixes on wiki:

and

http://music.goo.ne.jp/lyric/LYRUTND135351/index.html
http://www.amazon.co.jp/more-quality.../dp/B001FVNUL4
http://tennipri.tyent.jp/index.php/music/product/542

All of these products have "Self-Cover" in the title of it.

So unless you are an industry professional who can override the "naming" of these kinds of songs, they are Self-covers and not remixes.

Remixes are just that - re-mixing a song with previously existing tracks. There is no re-recording of the voice in any remix I have ever listened to. That would be simply a different version.

Take Whatever. They are two different recordings of the same melody and lyrics. They are not called remixes of each other, they are called versions.

A Best A Song for XX is not a remix in any form. It keeps the same instrumentation, but with changed vocals. Same with End Roll, and the others on the album. They are not marketed as remixes in any way, shape, or form.

So unfortunately, you are the only one in the planet who thinks like you do. All other Industry Professionals call these songs "Self-Covers" or "Version (insert title here)"

Originally Posted by Zeke.

I always wondered if the Acoustic version of Dearest had different vocals! It sounded slightly different to me so I am glad you have answered this question of mine without me ever having to ask it. Thanks!

Yeah, the voice is so different. Acoustic Version on the single is soft and delicate, and when she gets to the key change, she does some vocal adlibbing that is not found in the original track.