As far as I can see, remixes come in three flavours: (1) Basically the same song but extended and perhaps with the bass and drums accentuated or even a new rhythm track added, but still basically the same song in form and overall sound (albeit more bass heavy) (2) Like (1) but more rhythm orientated and with some very obvious remixing (e.g. delaying the intro of a verse or chorus, the rhythm pushed way forward in the mix, etc). However, the original song can be readily recognised. Now these two sorts of remixes I can understand. They're still the same song but pushed more towards the dance market. It's the third sort of remix I can't understand: (3) It says it's a remix of a song, but the rhythm track is utterly new and sounds nothing like the original song. Bits of the original song may be included, but they don't seem to match with the new rhythm track and the only discernable parts of the original song may be the same small section of lyric played over and over again. Just what the **** is going on here? It's so little like the original song that to call it a remix is like saying that if you cut up the Mona Lisa, jumbled up the pieces, pasted a tenth of them at random in a collage and then smeared it with a coat of paint that that is a 'remix' of the Mona Lisa. In other words, there is so little of the original song that it just isn't a remix, it's a new song (and usually a useless one at that). Please can anyone enlighten me? Given the popularity of such remixes, I'm clearly missing something.