How do you keep track of great cues so they aren't forgotten forever

[King Mark 3,631]

Most of us probably have amassed more film scores that it's even getting hard to listen to all of them. And once you do you may never re-visit that particular score for years to come

When you do get to something, how do you make sure a great track ends up in your re-play list?

I have a system where I save good cues in a special play list right after I listen to them, so at least I can listen to "best of" compilations from time to time

First, the "generic scores" I know I'll never listen to again. Mostly shit filler with maybe one or 2 good cue. Like Thor, The Dark World. Saved the Main Theme, Legacy and Marvel Studio Fanfare in the Play List, the rest will be forgotten forever

Second, scores that demand more attention and require 2-3 listens to separate the best tracks. Monument Mens is a good example for me.

Third, scores that are good enough to re-listen whole all the time. Very rare occurrence nowadays except the new Williams albums

Also,I very much miss my old ipod Nano that allowed you to add tracks in a special playlist by pressing the center button as they played ("on the fly" playlist). Now I have to remember them and do it when I get back home

[indy4 155]

I try to use the iTunes rating system. If there's a track that's a lot better than the rest of the tracks, such that I fear I won't return to it, I'll give it 5 stars (even if it's not worth that).

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I have about 6000 individual files. Keeping track is simple: I just don't have anything that I don't listen to regularly.

[Uni 306]

When I kicked my collecting into higher gear (going for more classic scores, attempting "complete" collections for a couple of composers, etc.), I started keeping a catalog that includes a column for listing "standout pieces." These are the ones that would make an appearance on my player, or as part of a "best of" playlist, etc. You're right--you've gotta do something to keep track of all those pieces.

[Hlao-roo 389]

I usually listen to albums in their entirety, regardless -- but I'm weird like that.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

This thread is thinking too much about it. I just collect and listen.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

If it was truly great, it wouldn't be forgotten.

[Incanus 5,715]

I usually listen to albums in their entirety, regardless -- but I'm weird like that.

You are not weird mon ami, not at all. Order and method Alan, order and method.

[Thor 7,508]

I usually listen to albums in their entirety, regardless -- but I'm weird like that.

Yup, I was just about to say that.

I'm a lover of the 'concept album' idea that is soundtracks. If there are great individual tracks, I'll let them come at their appropriate place within the total album experience.

[publicist 4,643]

It may really depend of your type of character but i find listening to albums often tedious (recent longer ones more so than lean 30-minute jobs). I'm a highlight man!

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Likewise. The whole 'concept album' bollox has never appealed to me.

[A24 4,338]

I think that only applies to bands like Queen. The hits are great, the rest is filler.

Alex -

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

That applies to most albums. A few highlights but plenty of skippable tracks.

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I tried the idea of 'tagging' outstanding tracks, but I decided a better solution was to avoid them being diluted in the first place. Hence, if two great tracks are buried in an otherwise unremarkable score, just keep the two tracks.

Deciding on whether an album is tat is the hard bit, and most scores under scrutiny take a few hours. However, I have a test - listen to a track, and ask myself whether it would bother me if I never heard that track again. If the answer is anything but an immediate 'no', then it means there's something in there worth keeping, and maybe the score is a candidate for creating two playlists (one with highlights, another with the whole thing).

We've probably all got far too much to regularly listen to, but I think the key is managing it so that whatever you put on (within your current mood), it will be good.

[A24 4,338]

That applies to most albums. A few highlights but plenty of skippable tracks.

Only really true for hit bands where the quality difference between hit and non-hit is enormous. Listening to the greatest hits album of a hit band makes absolute sense, but listening a 'best of album' of a concept album band like Pink Floyd is odd.

[publicist 4,643]

I tried the idea of 'tagging' outstanding tracks, but I decided a better solution was to avoid them being diluted in the first place. Hence, if two great tracks are buried in an otherwise unremarkable score, just keep the two tracks.

Sometimes it's deceiving though as i rediscovered several scores later and came to appreciate them much later only - case in point is John Barry, whose CHAPLIN, ACROSS THE SEA OF TIME, RUBY CAIRO and so on i initially dismissed and now consider major works (for Barry).

The recent releases like LAIR often piss me off because i have to listen to so much stuff i eventually dismiss that it just doesn't seem worth the bother.

[crocodile 8,017]

I don't keep track of anything. Sometimes it's nice to rediscover something after a very long time.

Karol

[Jay 37,368]

KM, you say you miss the feature of your old ipod nano where you could hold the center button and it adds the track you're listening to to an on the go playlist. What are you using to listen to music now? Because I'm pretty sure most every portable music players have a feature like that.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

KM doesn't bother with music players anymore. He just uses the PA system onboard the Executor.

[King Mark 3,631]

KM, you say you miss the feature of your old ipod nano where you could hold the center button and it adds the track you're listening to to an on the go playlist. What are you using to listen to music now? Because I'm pretty sure most every portable music players have a feature like that.

I have a newer Nano with a touch screen. You can create playlists but not add tracks as you play them like the old one

I tried the idea of 'tagging' outstanding tracks, but I decided a better solution was to avoid them being diluted in the first place. Hence, if two great tracks are buried in an otherwise unremarkable score, just keep the two tracks.

Sometimes it's deceiving though as i rediscovered several scores later and came to appreciate them much later only - case in point is John Barry, whose CHAPLIN, ACROSS THE SEA OF TIME, RUBY CAIRO and so on i initially dismissed and now consider major works (for Barry).

I agree deleting stuff is risky

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I usually listen to albums in their entirety, regardless -- but I'm weird like that.

This.

You wouldn't watch specific scenes from movies and forget the rest, would you? Would you? I hope not but I'm sure the answer for some people is yes.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Why would I watch the boring other two hours of 2001 when I can just watch the funny colors?

[publicist 4,643]

This.

You wouldn't watch specific scenes from movies and forget the rest, would you? Would you? I hope not but I'm sure the answer for some people is yes.

Why should music on a soundtrack album only function as slave to some movie (which in a lot of cases is best forgotten anyway)? That is exactly the kind of thinking that leads to whining fanboys because of a missing 30-second cues. Music released on a separate medium should stand on its own - and a lot of film score music doesn't (as a lot of very good composers have and will agree(d).

[King Mark 3,631]

That's also the reason we want some 30 second unreleased cue. In the case of Williams they can be highlights left off the album

Videogame scores are prime for "culling". They are often 4 disk affairs but they contain a few amazing cues

[Marian Schedenig 8,199]

When you do get to something, how do you make sure a great track ends up in your re-play list?

Memory. Doesn't always work, but it works better than I think any more technical solution would for me.

That said, I'm also generally for listening to the full album/score/work in one piece, but I now frequently also pick out highlights, especially when I don't have the time for a full album or I'm not sufficiently in the mood for something specific to stick with it for the whole duration. But more importantly, with all those Labels releases of recent years, I just don't have the time to listen to everything over and over again, so I'm trying to familiarise myself by at least repeating certain standout tracks so something might stick and compel me to revisit the album later on.

[Mr. Brown 91]

If there's a cue or a track that I really enjoy, I'll probably listen to it about 100 times, to the point where I remember the track name and title.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Exactly, memory is your friend. Utilize that mind palace.

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I usually listen to albums in their entirety, regardless -- but I'm weird like that.

This.

You wouldn't watch specific scenes from movies and forget the rest, would you? Would you? I hope not but I'm sure the answer for some people is yes.

Listening to isolated cues is not the same as watching the same lone scene over and over. Music is designed as a separately enjoyable medium.

[indy4 155]

This.

You wouldn't watch specific scenes from movies and forget the rest, would you? Would you? I hope not but I'm sure the answer for some people is yes.

Why should music on a soundtrack album only function as slave to some movie (which in a lot of cases is best forgotten anyway)? That is exactly the kind of thinking that leads to whining fanboys because of a missing 30-second cues. Music released on a separate medium should stand on its own - and a lot of film score music doesn't (as a lot of very good composers have and will agree(d).

I think Koray is using film as a representative of art in general, not saying that the music is only worthy in relation to te film. His statement could work for any form of art - for instance, would you only read one chapter of a book?

That said, I am fine listening to both highlights and a work in its totality (I do both every week). I think that because music is more abstract than other art forms, it is more open to interpretation, and thus more susceptible to audiences' reimaginings than film or literature. For instance, I can listen to "the Searcj for the Blue Fairy" and have a completely satisfying listening experience, because I have considerable freedom in my interpretation of the cue. I can also listen to the entire AI OST (or score) and appreciate the work in its larger context. Both are perfectly valid forms of listening, IMO, although certainly some scores lend themselves more to one approach over the other.

[Richard Penna 3,694]

I think Koray is using film as a representative of art in general, not saying that the music is only worthy in relation to te film. His statement could work for any form of art - for instance, would you only read one chapter of a book?

Why not? If it covers a part of the story you enjoy, I don't see what's wrong with that.

[Wojo 2,453]

If that's all the teacher assigned, why would you want to read beyond that? The grass isn't going to cut itself.

... At least, if I remember correctly.

[Uni 306]

That said, I am fine listening to both highlights and a work in its totality (I do both every week). I think that because music is more abstract than other art forms, it is more open to interpretation, and thus more susceptible to audiences' reimaginings than film or literature. For instance, I can listen to "the Searcj for the Blue Fairy" and have a completely satisfying listening experience, because I have considerable freedom in my interpretation of the cue. I can also listen to the entire AI OST (or score) and appreciate the work in its larger context. Both are perfectly valid forms of listening, IMO, although certainly some scores lend themselves more to one approach over the other.

Exactly. Both are perfectly legitimate approaches to a score. The context of KM's original question seemed to involve the more obscure scores we may not want to listen to all the time, but would like to see represented in some fashion in our general playlists. Doesn't mean we're rejecting altogether the idea of listening to scores in their entirety. It's just one of many approaches we take to the artform.

I think Koray is using film as a representative of art in general, not saying that the music is only worthy in relation to te film. His statement could work for any form of art - for instance, would you only read one chapter of a book?

Why not? If it covers a part of the story you enjoy, I don't see what's wrong with that.

I've read "Riddles in the Dark" at least fifty more times than I've read the rest of The Hobbit. There are other examples for me as well. (I happen to love one particular passage in John Grisham's The Rainmaker enough to have browsed through it frequently.) Again, there are no rules when it comes to the appreciation of artistic expression. Whatever makes it most enjoyable for you is how you ought to be going about it—not the way someone else enjoys it the most.

- Uni

[nightscape94 965]

Ultimately, the first time you expose yourself to art it should be as the artist intended. A full symphony, a full movie, a full book, so you understand the context and the big picture. I think you do yourself a disservice if you end up reading one stanza to a poem but never the whole thing. Once that is established, revisiting your favorite parts is perfectly fine, and in some cases necessary if you wish to study it in detail.

[Trent B 337]

There are times that I'll be in the mood to listen to certain tracks that I like the most from a score. Although, over all I tend to listen to the whole score.

[mrbellamy 6,287]

I usually listen to albums in their entirety, regardless -- but I'm weird like that.

This.

You wouldn't watch specific scenes from movies and forget the rest, would you? Would you? I hope not but I'm sure the answer for some people is yes.

I wouldn't say I "forget the rest" but are you telling me you've never been driving home from one work one day, recalled a particular scene from a movie that got you excited all over again, popped the BD in, and skipped right to that scene? You watch the whole movie every time, from beginning to end? Even if it's 3 hours? I'm always skipping around with my favorites. Sure, every couple years or so I'll rewatch them in their entirety because they're great movies, but most often I tend to just get the urge to watch those moments that made me fall in love with them in the first place. I often end up getting caught up in the movie anyway and watching more than I intended to, but I'm not seeing what's so horrible about watching something out of context if you're perfectly familiar with the work...

Same goes with music. I always listen to the album, soundtrack, symphony, or whatever in one piece the first time, but after that I have my favorite moments and those are what I listen to most often, occasionally going back to the ones I really love for the full experience. I don't think there's anything weird about grabbing my iPod and listening to "The Chairman's Waltz" and then moving on over to "The Asteroid Field" simply because they happen to have been stuck in my head that evening. Why listen to both albums straight through just because I got the urge to hear those two tracks? That seems ridiculous!

Unless that's not what you guys are saying. I don't really get it.