Popular Post phbart 609 Posted April 10, 2017 Popular Post Share Posted April 10, 2017 As we all know, the 1997 Special Edition OST 2CD set presented us with the complete recording sessions of the iconic Main Title on the last track of CD1. As we all know also, the sound quality of these separate takes is better (MUCH better, I think) than the final version presented on track 2 of the same CD1. I believe that some of you have already toyed with the idea of creating a version using the selected takes (18, 19 & 20, which the 1997 OST booklet dutifully informed us). So, to celebrate the 40th anniversary, here's my modest contribution (and the correspondent track from the 1997 OST for comparison). It was no easy task putting this together. In the end, it made me respect the work of music/sound editors, and EVEN MORE the work of music/sound editors of the analog era. Hope you like it! RICHARDSTRAUSS68, Cerebral Cortex, Ricard and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RICHARDSTRAUSS68 107 Posted April 10, 2017 Share Posted April 10, 2017 Great work! I like i! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted April 10, 2017 Author Share Posted April 10, 2017 I reuploaed the videos using a better audio codec and a proper background Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karelm 2,901 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 When you say "the sound quality of these separate takes is better (MUCH better, I think)", how are you defining sound quality? Do you mean the performance or the mixing/recording? To me, the final version in the film has slightly superior playing and note that the official main title has more compression (louder) so not exactly sure what you are meaning about the alternate takes sounding MUCH better. What someone needs to do is take a listen to the 8 versions of this theme used in all the movies and edit the best parts to make the definitive best version. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 10 minutes ago, karelm said: What someone needs to do is take a listen to the 8 versions of this theme used in all the movies and edit the best parts to make the definitive best version. What? Different performances, different acoustics, different microphones, tapes etc etc. Also, Eps 1/3 use the same recording actually phbart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faleel 5,326 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 He means that the raw versions of takes 18, 19, and 20 sound better than the opening track of the 97 SE (which is made up of 18, 19, and 20, so the playing should be identical between the two tracks you would think) phbart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted April 11, 2017 Author Share Posted April 11, 2017 24 minutes ago, Fal said: He means that the raw versions of takes 18, 19, and 20 sound better than the opening track of the 97 SE (which is made up of 18, 19, and 20, so the playing should be identical between the two tracks you would think) Yes, that! 40 minutes ago, karelm said: When you say "the sound quality of these separate takes is better (MUCH better, I think)", how are you defining sound quality? Do you mean the performance or the mixing/recording? To me, the final version in the film has slightly superior playing and note that the official main title has more compression (louder) so not exactly sure what you are meaning about the alternate takes sounding MUCH better. What someone needs to do is take a listen to the 8 versions of this theme used in all the movies and edit the best parts to make the definitive best version. I'm talking about the original Star Wars 1977/1997 Main Title version only. Not ESB, nor ROTJ, nor Eps I, II, III, VII, VIII, IX, X, XI, XII, XII, XIV, XV... And these are not alternate takes. I took the correspondent sections from each of these takes to create, from scratch, the original film version because of their superior sound quality. It was very difficult to do this and it took me a great deal of time to figure it out what sections were used, let alone combining them properly in Adobe Audition. However, it was no huge deal at all, since it's my favorite JW score (along with Indy trilogy, E.T., Jaws, CE3K, and so on ) Just "listen" to the videos and you'll get what I mean about better sound quality. Once 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
karelm 2,901 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 1 hour ago, Fal said: He means that the raw versions of takes 18, 19, and 20 sound better than the opening track of the 97 SE (which is made up of 18, 19, and 20, so the playing should be identical between the two tracks you would think) You both don't get what I am asking. What are you defining "sounds better" as? Louder? More precise? More vibrant? Greater instrumental separation? More musicality? Better mixed? Greater performance? I guess I don't follow the point of this thread. To me, what the OP claims is "MUCH better" hasn't been substantiated and is very unclear as to why he thinks so. Maybe I am just extra dense tonight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faleel 5,326 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 @Bartokus Novus did the same experiment a while back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominicCobb 194 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 Which takes make up which parts of the track? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post phbart 609 Posted April 11, 2017 Author Popular Post Share Posted April 11, 2017 8 hours ago, DominicCobb said: Which takes make up which parts of the track? 0:00 to 0:08, tk.19 0:08 to 0:43, tk.18 0:43 to 1:31, tk.20 1:31 to 1:43, tk.18 1:43 to end, tk.20 enderdrag64, Amer, Jay and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted April 11, 2017 Author Share Posted April 11, 2017 10 hours ago, karelm said: You both don't get what I am asking. What are you defining "sounds better" as? Louder? More precise? More vibrant? Greater instrumental separation? More musicality? Better mixed? Greater performance? I guess I don't follow the point of this thread. To me, what the OP claims is "MUCH better" hasn't been substantiated and is very unclear as to why he thinks so. Maybe I am just extra dense tonight. A good pair of headphones or loudspeakers might solve the "density" issue here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,249 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 3 hours ago, phbart said: 0:00 to 0:08, tk.19 0:08 to 0:43, tk.18 0:43 to 1:31, tk.20 1:31 to 1:43, tk.18 1:43 to end, tk.20 How long did it take you to figure that out? phbart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted April 11, 2017 Author Share Posted April 11, 2017 2 hours ago, Jay said: How long did it take you to figure that out? A couple of hours, for sure, going back and forth between the raw takes and track 2 of CD1. And that was just to solve the puzzle of the correct takes. Then came the "pleasant" surprise that was to realize that different portions of the takes were used in different portions of the final version. Then there was the editing process, and THAT took me even more time. It was grueling, to say the least. But ultimately satisfying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,249 Posted April 11, 2017 Share Posted April 11, 2017 I admire your determination! phbart 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted April 11, 2017 Author Share Posted April 11, 2017 Thanks! It was no huge deal, after all. I ended up laughing in the end, thinking about the music editor who worked on this back in '77. I imagined him when JW started to do like "I want take 19 here, then take 18 there, then blablabla...". He probably wanted to kill JW! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted May 4, 2017 Author Share Posted May 4, 2017 The finished version opens with take 19. And only the first 8 seconds of it was used. All the rest of the finished version are from takes 18 and 20. Now, if you listen to those same 8 seconds from the other takes (16, 17, 18 and 20), they're completely different. And for all the opening themes of the other Star Wars films, John Williams followed what was recorded on those inital 8 seconds of take 19. I guess we can call it "Take 19: the 8 seconds that changed film history". Jay 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay 37,249 Posted May 4, 2017 Share Posted May 4, 2017 Are you taking it a bit to far to say its "completely" different? How would you describe the differences? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phbart 609 Posted May 5, 2017 Author Share Posted May 5, 2017 Okay, I may have exaggerated a bit. They may not be "completely" different, but they're still a lot different from take 19. I'll upload to youtube the first 8 seconds from all the takes for an easier comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthDementous 1,059 Posted May 6, 2017 Share Posted May 6, 2017 ah, that was a pleasant listen, gotta love that unrelenting wall of LSO brass. with my new pretty good (if I say so myself) earphones things definitely did sound clear and more kind of 'tighter' like in more modern recordings of the title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now