The Official La-La Land Records Thread

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,476]

I don't mind double dipping when it comes to soundtracks, for the most part. I'd rather they re-release a lot of my old albums with complete scores remastered. I love that trend.

[indy4 152]

Yay for the new JW releases!

[Datameister 1,394]

Is there any release done really right?

There could be. It'd be incredibly easy. Just release the OST like usual - chopped up, out of order, with things mixed differently, etc. Then include a special code in the packaging that allows the buyer to download the complete film score in a format of their choice for just a few bucks more. No edits, no missing elements. Just each cue presented as a separate file, with all the elements mixed as intended. Casual listeners get to have their short 'n' sweet "listening experience", and serious film score fans get to have that plus all the other music they want. Easy, financially responsible, and no one has anything to complain about.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,476]

I can think of few releases that are really definitive.

[Richard Penna 2,084]

Less than 10 minutes, I believe. Still, they should have done it right the first time, same with The Matrix.

The fact that The Matrix: Deluxe hasn't sold out since 2008 isn't because people aren't interested in the score; It's because the complete score in perfect sound had already been available for years before it in lossless format if you knew where to look. If Varese's CD had been as complete as that, it would have sold all 3,000 copies fairly quick. But since it was just expanded and a ton of music was still missing, people who already had the complete score had almost no reason to buy it.

This is why I think that the labels need to at least silently acknowledge the boots/promos out there. The Matrix feels like an incomplete product competing with a boot, and Varese shouldn't be surprised that it hasn't sold out.

You could say a similar thing with Honey, I Shrunk the Kids from Intrada, which hasn't sold 3000 copies in about 15 months. The boot had very good sound, and Horner goes and makes a 'listening experience' that leaves off 10 minutes of music, including two major sequences and I think some material with the 'family' theme.

I stand by my firm belief that score restorations aren't a time to create a listening experience. Adopt the approach Intrada's taking with next week's release if they want, but leaving material off entirely, for the hell of it, or just to save pressing 2 discs (or in the case of Shrunk, left off for no reason at all) ? Uncool.

[Andy 1,492]

Amen. I really like the approach Intrada is taking.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

richuk,

To me, this is more of a sad reflection on how boots are hurting the industry, than of the need to release the complete scores.

The fact is, removing music is done for both artistic AND financial reasons, and with nobody buying the CD because a boot is more complete, it meas basically that thievery has won out in those cases.

I've actually taken a stance against these unmentionables, though in a slightly gray way, I guess.

When it comes to one of these, I only get it under the following conditions:

- I will not pay the bootleggers or pedlers. I get a copy or a gift ONLY.

- I ensure that I have the official release, in it's latest or most expanded form.

- If I have a Complete or Near complete copy of a score, the boot is simply destroyed.

- If I have a boot of something completely unreleased, and an official release comes along, the official release is purchased, or the boot destroyed, and all ripped files erased.

This way, I am ensuring that I pay for a copy of the music whenever possible, without rewarding the thievery.

I very rarely, if ever, obtain an unmentionable these days.

[Trent B 317]

I have to agree with Jason about The Matrix. I didn't know it hasn't sold out but I too have kept my complete boot for that score. There was still some material left off and Varèse even went as far as doing a copy and paste job of OST tracks for the Deluxe Edition instead of giving us the full unedited versions of said tracks. They even left off the cue "A Virus" from the OST for the Deluxe Edition which I think they could have fit onto the CD with out any problem.

The only way I will get rid of a boot that I have if it's given a legit release is if the legit version is fully 100% complete. If there's still some material missing, especially if it's important material I'll still keep the boot but at the same time buy the official version.

[Richard Penna 2,084]

- I will not pay the bootleggers or pedlers. I get a copy or a gift ONLY. - nor will I. as I said in another thread earlier, I'm firmly against buying or selling boots.

- I ensure that I have the official release, in it's latest or most expanded form. - my comments about the matrix were made in the context that I wouldn't have bought it anyway (I'm not a big fan of the score). I always buy official releases - I was simply referring to some of their shortcomings and that it's frustrating to have to make up for them.

- If I have a Complete or Near complete copy of a score, the boot is simply destroyed. - I do that too, but if the proper release is missing anything, I keep the missing cues.

- If I have a boot of something completely unreleased, and an official release comes along, the official release is purchased, or the boot destroyed, and all ripped files erased.

This way, I am ensuring that I pay for a copy of the music whenever possible, without rewarding the thievery.

I very rarely, if ever, obtain an unmentionable these days.

Here comes the 'holier than thou' stance again. Ditch boots and you're left with whatever the label can afford to release (which, you might've noticed, is absolutely nothing in many cases). Instead, we have a way to work round the frankly insane film score releasing process, and once in a while a label will make a legit version.

And I personally feel it's the duty of the labels to provide the best representation of the score that they can, and that they and the composer should consider what's already out there and determine a presentation that will sell.

[Charlie Brigden 5]

The thing is, whenever a release comes out and people are not happy with it, the label seems to get a slating regardless of whether any of the factors behind the decisions involved are known. Which just seems petty. Varese have released hundreds upon hundreds of scores and have been a gigantic force behind getting the kind of music we love out there, but all of a sudden they're the worst label out there because they don't include a few bits of choir and some liner notes. That's ludicrous. We (and certainly FSM) tend to jump to conclusions here when something goes "wrong" because we're getting so much good stuff from all the labels, but I do think we need to occasionally step back and take in a bit of perspective.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

This isn't about "holier than thou". It's about tempering our craving for the music we love with respect for the labors of those who are trying to get it out.

In the case of The Matrix: Deluxe Edition, it was not the best presentation.

It was expanded because people wanted it, just like any other expanded release.

If the boot didn't exist, you would have purchased the Deluxe Edition, unless you were satisfied with the original score release.

Take Star Trek.

We all know that there are micro-edits, missing percussion and choir overlays, skipy liner notes etc., and yet we still enjoy it for the most part.

If there was a boot with the missing material, you would not have obtained the Deluxe. So a legitimate expansion is done, at great expense to the label, only to have lousy sales.

And those lousy sales are there because: THERE IS A MORE COMPLETE BOOT.

Like it or not, boots are basically theft. In some cases, they are needed (when no score is released, or no adequate release exists), but it is theft nonetheless.

[Jacob 0]

In 5 years we will have to buy...

Except we don't.

[publicist 4,484]

In 5 years we will have to buy...

Except we don't.

Splitting hairs and you know it. If i buy ALIEN today and it gets re-released 5 years later in an even 'better' representation, i certainly wouldn't buy it again, but i will be pissed that they did it again. That's it and i am at a total loss of understanding how anyone could be satisfied with hoarding cd racks of duplicates (which are not cheap, either).

If there was a boot with the missing material, you would not have obtained the Deluxe. So a legitimate expansion is done, at great expense to the label, only to have lousy sales.

And those lousy sales are there because: THERE IS A MORE COMPLETE BOOT.

From the thunderous reception this STAR TREK DELUXE got i would deduct that it's anything than lousy sales. There were perfectly alright boots of IQ, PLAYERS and what-have-you, even a thrice-released BLUE MAX CD got another airing this spring, all this stuff sold out in hours.

This argument goes back to the early 2000's and bootlegged isolated scores...it's like the 80's paranoia about dying forests. Never happened...

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

Like it or not, boots are basically theft. In some cases, they are needed (when no score is released, or no adequate release exists), but it is theft nonetheless.

"Get me a lawyer."

[fommes 126]

Publicist, you forget that there are a lot of people, including me, who have missed out on things like Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Predator, Towering Inferno, Poseidon Adventure/Paper Chase and many others. In five years, there will be a whole new batch of people that have missed out on Star Trek: The Deluxe Edition, The Blue Max, the Batman animation scores, etc.

Do you really begrudge me and others those CDs? Because that's what it boils down to, you know.

Now, what you cán be pissed off about, in my opinion, is:

- the too-limited-edition nature of many releases, which Varèse pretty much 'mainstreamed', and which Intrada took over. I know it's not good 'business'-wise, but I'm a big supporter of the FSM way, at least 3000-editions: in that way, there would be less stress, and everything can pick up what they want when they want without having to worry about releases that are selling out constantly. The important thing here is that a good score, let alone a great score, should be available. To everyone and at all times. So that's why reissues are great.

- when a label releases an expanded/complete edition with faults/mistakes on it. Perfect case in point is the new Star Trek. Thís is in fact what would make me buy a new release in, say, ten years. And thís is the real problem, not the rereleasing in itself. If this edition would have been perfect (in FSM/Intrada standards), I would not buy a reissue Varèse or another label might be doing down the line. Now, it's not a conspiracy either: Varèse didn't do this edition with its, eh, oversights because they're doing a new release in ten years time. (It cannot be compared with the double-dipping on the DVD/Blu-ray market.) It's because Varèse themselves are slightly imperfect in this case.

Everybody has their own favourites, by the way, which they want released completely or perfectly. A lot of people were over the moon with the recent RoboCop edition; I'm perfectly happy with my Varèse version. But I'm glad it's out there for those other people; and some day it will be/has been my turn. Again, a maximum amount of good scores on CD - as long as the format still exists, damnit - is a good thing.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

Publicist, you forget that there are a lot of people, including me, who have missed out on things like Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Predator, Towering Inferno, Poseidon Adventure/Paper Chase and many others. In five years, there will be a whole new batch of people that have missed out on Star Trek: The Deluxe Edition, The Blue Max, the Batman animation scores, etc.

Do you really begrudge me and others those CDs? Because that's what it boils down to, you know.

Now, what you cán be pissed off about, in my opinion, is:

- the too-limited-edition nature of many releases, which Varèse pretty much 'mainstreamed', and which Intrada took over. I know it's not good 'business'-wise, but I'm a big supporter of the FSM way, at least 3000-editions: in that way, there would be less stress, and everything can pick up what they want when they want without having to worry about releases that are selling out constantly. The important thing here is that a good score, let alone a great score, should be available. To everyone and at all times. So that's why reissues are great.

- when a label releases an expanded/complete edition with faults/mistakes on it. Perfect case in point is the new Star Trek. Thís is in fact what would make me buy a new release in, say, ten years. And thís is the real problem, not the rereleasing in itself. If this edition would have been perfect (in FSM/Intrada standards), I would not buy a reissue Varèse or another label might be doing down the line. Now, it's not a conspiracy either: Varèse didn't do this edition with its, eh, oversights because they're doing a new release in ten years time. (It cannot be compared with the double-dipping on the DVD/Blu-ray market.) It's because Varèse themselves are slightly imperfect in this case.

Everybody has their own favourites, by the way, which they want released completely or perfectly. A lot of people were over the moon with the recent RoboCop edition; I'm perfectly happy with my Varèse version. But I'm glad it's out there for those other people; and some day it will be/has been my turn. Again, a maximum amount of good scores on CD - as long as the format still exists, damnit - is a good thing.

Speculators are terrified that the ten of everything they hoarded for future online auction profiteering will be significantly devalued. They would have been better off investing in gold and real estate.

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

If the boot didn't exist, you would have purchased the Deluxe Edition, unless you were satisfied with the original score release.

[...]

If there was a boot with the missing material, you would not have obtained the Deluxe. So a legitimate expansion is done, at great expense to the label, only to have lousy sales.

[...]

Like it or not, boots are basically theft. In some cases, they are needed (when no score is released, or no adequate release exists), but it is theft nonetheless.

I did buy the Matrix DE even though there was the promo (as far as I know, it's a promo, not a boot, correct?). I would have bought the Star Trek DE even if I had a complete boot. And boots are not theft.

[publicist 4,484]

Publicist, you forget that there are a lot of people, including me, who have missed out on things like Die Hard, Lethal Weapon, Predator, Towering Inferno, Poseidon Adventure/Paper Chase and many others. In five years, there will be a whole new batch of people that have missed out on Star Trek: The Deluxe Edition, The Blue Max, the Batman animation scores, etc.

Do you really begrudge me and others those CDs? Because that's what it boils down to, you know.

Duly noted, but that argument goes the other way around, too. Do you laugh in the face of people who spent hundreds of $ per year and then see their precious released again in slightly superior form (if at all) by a different label a short time later?

I guess this discussion will go nowhere, but let me say this: it isn't really about doing a new PREDATOR LE every 5 years, what pisses me off is that fact that it's a business model without much regard (or interest) for a loyal but small fanbase. This is no problem for giants like Sony, but certainly for speciality labels having a core group of 5000 customers. I'd like to see at least an acknowledgement directed at the customers that they try to work on deals like (say) download it for a cheaper price or get a discount if you already bought the first (or second)one. There are ways, and i have not seen any evidence by now that any involved party (save maybe FSM) has considered that.

[Trent B 317]

When La-La Land released Independence Day I was extremely excited and happy about the release, knowing I would finally be able to listen to EVERYTHING after all this time. After getting the score, I realized that two pieces of cues used an alternate material at some point instead of what's heard in the film. Luckily the World Records (and first boot) version of the score which had the same sound quality for those two pieces of music and I was able to edit them back in nicely with no problems. I also used the World Records (and first boot) version to make clean intros/endings for the cues on Track 3 of Disc 1 as well as a couple of other cues that were meant to be separated.

However, once that was all completed I deleted both boots right away. I primarily did that to the cues strictly for my iPod, the original cues are left in tact on my hard drive in a separate folder.

As I said I will only keep a boot if the legit version is not 100% complete but the boot is. However, if the legit version is longer than the said boot and there's no need to keep it then I will delete it, especially if it has better sound quality.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

Trent, that's a good policy.

Personally, I listen to everything from my PC, so I do a fair amount of customizing of my soundtracks (film order, combining multi-disc sets into a single virtual album, separating alternates into separate virtual albums etc.).

I know I sounded a little more "hard assed" re: this subject, but the line for me is that if a good legitimate release exists, then I should have that release.

For every unmentionable I have, either the score is unavailable (not released, long-gone limited edition, OST long OOP), or I have the OST and/or expanded versions in my collection.

Having these in and of themselves is not really where the issue is. It's when I read that someone will not get an expanded or complete release of a score because they have the boot.

When having the boot trumps a legitimate release, it turns from unlicensed music into pure theft.

We all have to draw a moral and ethical line in the sand, especially if the work done to get these scores out means anything to us.

People's livelihoods ARE being affected by unmentionables. Whatever the merits or demerits of a legitimate release, we do not have a right to this material, only the privilege of enjoying it.

[Richard Penna 2,084]

(to Trent) That's a different case - LLL had to make some decisions about what to include, given the wealth of alternates. That doesn't compare to issuing an expansion and leaving actual score off.

I guess I sympathize with the labels with repeated reissues. They're working with hard-to-locate elements, studios that can't organise their property and all kinds of legal crap. If they make some breakthrough, you can't blame them for wanting to make it available.

Having these in and of themselves is not really where the issue is. It's when I read that someone will not get an expanded or complete release of a score because they have the boot.

On principle I agree. However I'm talking about isolated cases where the expanded release has significant shortcomings related to the boot.

Take a theoretical circumstance where the full recording sessions for all four Indy scores surface before Concord's set, and the sessions didn't have any editorial/pitch/alternate take issues. You're basically ditching a set that fully satisfies you and paying for an inferior version (and possibly replacing a lot of cues, largely defeating the point).

Luckily Concord didn't have the 'competition', but if they did, I don't think the issue is as black-and-white as you're suggesting.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

If the boot didn't exist, you would have purchased the Deluxe Edition, unless you were satisfied with the original score release.

[...]

If there was a boot with the missing material, you would not have obtained the Deluxe. So a legitimate expansion is done, at great expense to the label, only to have lousy sales.

[...]

Like it or not, boots are basically theft. In some cases, they are needed (when no score is released, or no adequate release exists), but it is theft nonetheless.

I did buy the Matrix DE even though there was the promo (as far as I know, it's a promo, not a boot, correct?). I would have bought the Star Trek DE even if I had a complete boot. And boots are not theft.

They ARE theft. No musicians, performers, composers, engineers, copyright owners, record producers, lawyers, or anyone else involved with creating the music are getting their fair share of the proceeds, and someone who sees the boot, and then the OST, would go for the boot, thus cheating everyone who worked on the OST out of their livelihoods one CD at a time.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,476]

I've never gotten a boot instead of an official soundtrack album...?

I place blame on the studios that keep the music hostage in varying states of decay many times and high legal fees. We're at least lucky to have these labels nowadays trying to get the stuff out there.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

I've never gotten a boot instead of an official soundtrack album...?

Some have.

I place blame on the studios that keep the music hostage in varying states of decay many times and high legal fees. We're at least lucky to have these labels nowadays trying to get the stuff out there.

Perhaps. But it is theirs to do with as they choose. Not the bootlegger's

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

They ARE theft. No musicians, performers, composers, engineers, copyright owners, record producers, lawyers, or anyone else involved with creating the music are getting their fair share of the proceeds, and someone who sees the boot, and then the OST, would go for the boot, thus cheating everyone who worked on the OST out of their livelihoods one CD at a time.

I'm not saying they're legal. I'm saying they are not theft. Theft is defined (according to Wikipedia) as "the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent", "taking" implying that what you are taking from that person is no longer in that person's possession.

Your typical boot is a *copy* of whatever sources are in someone's possession. Distributing (and possibly selling) the boot will likely result in someone not making money he would be legally entitled to by selling (if he wants to) his sources, but making and distributing a boot does not usually consist of taking *away* something someone had and thus preventing him from using it.

I'm being so picky here because in German-speaking countries mislabelling goes even further by calling boots robbery, when robbery is defined as taking another person's property by physical force - which is a considerably stronger offense than "mere" theft and completely unrelated to any kind of illegal copying of music.

(In particular, making an illegal copy of someone's soundtrack for personal listening and then buying every legal release that person releases of that music is still illegal, but does in no way harm that person or prevent him/her from doing anything with his property. Hence no theft)

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,476]

Yeah, look man. We're human. This is a hobby. People love this stuff. I'm not going to blame anyone for acquiring a boot when it isn't available. Or something OOP and demanding a bazillion dollars to some guy on the internet. I just can't. And I'm not trying to steal from anybody.

[Trent B 317]

Also keep in mind the composers themselves tend to leak out the complete scores or promos of the said music but a lot of people still think of it as a boot. With the composers themselves doing it, they want their music heard and they know we want to hear it.

[indy4 152]

The composer is not the only person profiting from a release. Hundreds of people look to these releases as a means of survival. Sure, maybe John Williams doesn't need any more money from the Indy scores, but what about the guy that made the logo? Or the guy that formatted the booklet?

[OneBuckFilms 181]

They ARE theft. No musicians, performers, composers, engineers, copyright owners, record producers, lawyers, or anyone else involved with creating the music are getting their fair share of the proceeds, and someone who sees the boot, and then the OST, would go for the boot, thus cheating everyone who worked on the OST out of their livelihoods one CD at a time.

I'm not saying they're legal. I'm saying they are not theft. Theft is defined (according to Wikipedia) as "the illegal taking of another person's property without that person's freely-given consent", "taking" implying that what you are taking from that person is no longer in that person's possession.

Your typical boot is a *copy* of whatever sources are in someone's possession. Distributing (and possibly selling) the boot will likely result in someone not making money he would be legally entitled to by selling (if he wants to) his sources, but making and distributing a boot does not usually consist of taking *away* something someone had and thus preventing him from using it.

I'm being so picky here because in German-speaking countries mislabelling goes even further by calling boots robbery, when robbery is defined as taking another person's property by physical force - which is a considerably stronger offense than "mere" theft and completely unrelated to any kind of illegal copying of music.

(In particular, making an illegal copy of someone's soundtrack for personal listening and then buying every legal release that person releases of that music is still illegal, but does in no way harm that person or prevent him/her from doing anything with his property. Hence no theft)

If someone copies the private contents of your Hard Disk, it is still theft. Period. Spies are convicted for precisely this.

When you but a CD, you're purchasing a copy of the music, as well as the rights to listen to the music.

When you make your own CD, you are stealing the rights, in a sense, to listen to that music. You're stealing intellectual property. Even if not tangible in the way of a solid object, or the master tapes, it is still theft. Don't kid yourself.

Saying that, if you've read what I posted carefully, if a score has not been released at all, or you've purchased a legal copy, then there are no material damages stemming for it. Morally gray, but there nonetheless.

But if you want to get strict and finite about it, even that is theft. The bootlegger did not pay what a legitimate label would if they were to release that material. If there is no demand for a score, because a boot exists, any soundtrack label would be hard pressed to release it, because everyone already HAS it, and it wouldn't sell.

The Matrix: Deluxe simply isn't selling. Because someone knows there's music missing that is ON THE BOOT.

The composer is not the only person profiting from a release. Hundreds of people look to these releases as a means of survival. Sure, maybe John Williams doesn't need any more money from the Indy scores, but what about the guy that made the logo? Or the guy that formatted the booklet?

I think we all know the difference between a promo and a boot.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,476]

Plenty of limited editions take years to sell out. Maybe there just isn't as much of a fanbase for the Matrix score. I mean, I liked it in the film, but never enough to want to seek out the music on its own.

[Marian Schedenig 5,520]

If someone copies the private contents of your Hard Disk, it is still theft. Period. Spies are convicted for precisely this.

It's illegal (except when they're customs - then they apparently are allowed to copy everything, even stuff neither I nor they have the necessary rights for distributing). But I still have the contents, hence it's not theft. They didn't take the data *away* from me. It's simply a term that cannot be directly applied to digital data.

When you make your own CD, you are stealing the rights, in a sense, to listen to that music. You're stealing intellectual property. Even if not tangible in the way of a solid object, or the master tapes, it is still theft. Don't kid yourself.

I'm not kidding, I'm arguing actual widespread mis-labelling of copyright offenses (heavily supported by the industry). Especially the aforementioned "robbery" thing in German. It's simply not true. It's a different offense, and a considerably stronger one (which isn't saying that copyright law is irrelevant, but it's not the same as physically inflicting pain on someone). I don't know about US law, but at least over here, as far as I know, "objects" in law generally do refer to physical, solid items.

Which ultimately leads to a simple conclusion: Copyright law is in serious need of updating.

To Trent's comment above: If a composer distributes copies of his own film scores, that doesn't necessarily "un-boot" them. Williams is among the few composers who, as far as I know, keep the rights to their compositions. And even he probably doesn't have the rights to the recordings. Unless their contract allows them to distribute certain amounts of the score recordings on their own, even a single copy they give away would be a boot.

[Trent B 317]

Plenty of limited editions take years to sell out. Maybe there just isn't as much of a fanbase for the Matrix score. I mean, I liked it in the film, but never enough to want to seek out the music on its own.

Ya I too think there isn't much of a fan base for The Matrix music. Not too many are familiar with it, plus I think the consideration of costs for limited edition runs also plays into a factor.

Speaking of the fan base, take the recent releases from Varèse. Star Trek, which is limited to 5,000 copies has less than 300 left, which is pretty impressive so far and the price is pretty reasonable. Spartacus which is also limited to 5,000 copies but many people have barked at the price and most of the people I do agree with, it's pretty expensive just for one score.

It may take Spartacus a lot longer to sell out than Star Trek, simply because Star Trek has a bigger fan base than Spartacus.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

If someone copies the private contents of your Hard Disk, it is still theft. Period. Spies are convicted for precisely this.

It's illegal (except when they're customs - then they apparently are allowed to copy everything, even stuff neither I nor they have the necessary rights for distributing). But I still have the contents, hence it's not theft. They didn't take the data *away* from me. It's simply a term that cannot be directly applied to digital data.

When you make your own CD, you are stealing the rights, in a sense, to listen to that music. You're stealing intellectual property. Even if not tangible in the way of a solid object, or the master tapes, it is still theft. Don't kid yourself.

I'm not kidding, I'm arguing actual widespread mis-labelling of copyright offenses (heavily supported by the industry). Especially the aforementioned "robbery" thing in German. It's simply not true. It's a different offense, and a considerably stronger one (which isn't saying that copyright law is irrelevant, but it's not the same as physically inflicting pain on someone). I don't know about US law, but at least over here, as far as I know, "objects" in law generally do refer to physical, solid items.

Which ultimately leads to a simple conclusion: Copyright law is in serious need of updating.

To Trent's comment above: If a composer distributes copies of his own film scores, that doesn't necessarily "un-boot" them. Williams is among the few composers who, as far as I know, keep the rights to their compositions. And even he probably doesn't have the rights to the recordings. Unless their contract allows them to distribute certain amounts of the score recordings on their own, even a single copy they give away would be a boot.

I'm sorry, but there is a reason FACT is called the Federation Against Copyright Theft. It is taking that which you have no right to take, even if it's only making a copy.

But of course, there is that gray line. Composers often get permission from the studio to dirstribute scores within the business to get work. That's why they are Promos, as in Promotional.

It is not the same area of the law, but it is still, morally and ethically, the same thing.

[Jacob 0]

In 5 years we will have to buy...

Except we don't.

Splitting hairs and you know it.

Nah. Just pointing out the obvious.

If i buy ALIEN today and it gets re-released 5 years later in an even 'better' representation, i certainly wouldn't buy it again, but i will be pissed that they did it again. That's it and i am at a total loss of understanding how anyone could be satisfied with hoarding cd racks of duplicates (which are not cheap, either).

Well, I'm more phlegmatic. It all seems rather benign to me.

I spend my money on stuff I like. If better stuff gets released down the road then more power to the labels and whoever wants to spend money on it.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

It's not like someone in possession of a boot physically withdrew hard cash from a composer's bank account. I see a fan gaining, and an artist potentially gaining if labels actually released their material to be sold.

[Admiral Holdo 16]

With me, it's pretty simple. If the music is released, I'll buy it - but if there's missing music that I want, I'll find a way to obtain that too.

Don't want me to get that boot? Release it complete. No two ways about it.

What's that phrase... "give the people what they want."

[publicist 4,484]

I find all this thievery talk rather absurd. If HARRY POTTER complete hits megaupload, i'd sure like to play mouse on the harddrives of the most ardent copyright suppporters here. In 95% of the cases, they will download it and find a rationale for it. From my understanding, the only thing that prevents people from doing this stuff is fear

I find all this thievery talk rather absurd. If HARRY POTTER complete hits megaupload, i'd sure like to play mouse on the harddrives of the most ardent copyright suppporters here. In 95% of the cases, they will download it and find a rationale for it. From my understanding, the only thing that prevents people from doing this stuff is fear

[OneBuckFilms 181]

To clarify;

- If I have the legitimate release, then I have no issue getting the footwarmer.

- If nothing has been released, or the score is unattainable, then I'd have no issue there.

- If there is a legitimate release, and I don't have it, but I have the boot, this is the problem area.

Technically, any boot is theft, but in the first two cases above, it's effectively victimless.

[Charlie Brigden 5]

How do we know the slow sales of The Matrix aren't due to it not being very good?

[Richard Penna 2,084]

Umm, I don't think that's the reason at all. It's been mentioned several times that we think it's due to a more or less perfect promo already existing - people don't feel this release offers them anything new.

With me, it's pretty simple. If the music is released, I'll buy it - but if there's missing music that I want, I'll find a way to obtain that too.

Don't want me to get that boot? Release it complete. No two ways about it.

What's that phrase... "give the people what they want."

That's the magic phrase. If you expand something, but don't make it to match something people are already listening to, you should not be surprised when some of them think "ok, why should I pay for an inferior presentation?"

To clarify;

- If there is a legitimate release, and I don't have it, but I have the boot, this is the problem area.

Technically, any boot is theft, but in the first two cases above, it's effectively victimless.

Yes but you're assuming that the legit release is perfect.

I find the DE wanting more because it's still riddled with edits - it's a downgrade from the promo and it's a relatively isolated case.

I'm sorry, but there is a reason FACT is called the Federation Against Copyright Theft. It is taking that which you have no right to take, even if it's only making a copy.

You're sounding more like an employee of the MPAA every day.

But of course, there is that gray line. Composers often get permission from the studio to dirstribute scores within the business to get work. That's why they are Promos, as in Promotional.

And when they're more established they give away promos to get more music out there than the market currently allows.

So yes, favouring a boot over a legit release is questionable but I'd say that if that's happening on a mass scale then it's not buying habits that need to change - it's the system for releasing music.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

- If there is a legitimate release, and I don't have it, but I have the boot, this is the problem area.

Like I said, it's not like you're physically draining money from an artist's account if you're in possession of a boot. Plus, no-one has to know you have it anyway. It's not as if it's a ticking bomb in your collection waiting to be found by a police raid.

[OneBuckFilms 181]

Whether an expanded release, or an OST release, is perfect, is not an assumption on my part, and is not relevent.

People are skipping the expanded, legitimate release of a score due to certain items being missing that are on the boot.

If not for the boot, the expanded release would have sold, though some would have pointed out that there was still something missing.

The boot, then, has interfered with the business. Period. That's it, right there.

Without the boot, that CD is worth every penny to someone because they want the extra music.

WITH the boot, that CD becomes effectively worthless, because it's already out there and more complete. So because of 1 missing track, one bad take, or whatever the issue is, an otherwise good release suffers.

[Richard Penna 2,084]

Well I can see where OneBuck is coming from. If the full sessions for ID4 had leaked a month before LLL revealed their release, and people didn't buy it because of the sessions, that's a problem. But I only say that because LLL barely put a foot wrong with their release.

I think it's 2 different problems actually - one is asking people to pay for something they've obtained for free (which widely affects normal music too). The other is asking them to accept the presentation you're offering.

[Jay 27,216]

Pretty much the entire ID4 score WAS available as a boot prior to the LLL release, actually. The LLL only gave us around 17 minutes (11 of film cues, 6 of unused alternates) of music we never had clean before. I think the difference is that the LLL ID4 is complete, they gave us everything. The Varese DE of The Matrix is far from complete, and the prior boot was 100% complete with perfect sound and no weird sequencing.

Then again, we don't KNOW for a fact that ID4 has sold more - all we know is that they pressed 5,000 ID4s and 3,000 Matrixes and neither label has given us a low quantity alert

[Trent B 317]

Independence Day still really wasn't complete, I mean the boot wasn't. It didn't have the revised film version battle cues. La-La Land's version is the best representation of the score and is superior to that of the two boots.

Even if the full sessions had leaked prior to LLL's set, it's possible a lot of people would have still bought it. Most of us prefer legit versions of these scores and factory pressed CD's. I wouldn't be surprised if LLL's ID-4 has sold more than Varèse "Deluxe Edition" of The Matrix.

[Unlucky Bastard 7,765]

Independence Day still really wasn't complete, I mean the boot wasn't. It didn't have the revised film version battle cues. La-La Land's version is the best representation of the score and is superior to that of the two boots.

Plus it included the full 13 minute final battle alternate, which the LLL version only gives us a snippet of. It's still a decent presentation of the score.

[Luke Skywalker 1,286]

To Trent's comment above: If a composer distributes copies of his own film scores, that doesn't necessarily "un-boot" them. Williams is among the few composers who, as far as I know, keep the rights to their compositions. And even he probably doesn't have the rights to the recordings. Unless their contract allows them to distribute certain amounts of the score recordings on their own, even a single copy they give away would be a boot.

Now that you mention that, in ubeda they mentioned, i think it was tadlow's producer (james fitzpatrick) that the only composers to have the 100% of their rights (and therefore making re-recordings easy to come by) were Mancini and Rozsa. He mentioned that not even john Williams has his full rights.

[Richard Penna 2,084]

Even if the full sessions had leaked prior to LLL's set, it's possible a lot of people would have still bought it. Most of us prefer legit versions of these scores and factory pressed CD's. I wouldn't be surprised if LLL's ID-4 has sold more than Varèse "Deluxe Edition" of The Matrix.

One was an organised, properly presented upgrade, and the other was a microedited expansion that takes steps back from the promo (and incidentally, as a result still left off several moments that I wanted).

So yes, they probably would have still bought ID4, but I think it's clear that doesn't hold true for The Matrix. and I don't think the consumer is to blame.

[Wojo 2,442]

I haven't watched The Matrix enough for the score to resonate with me the way that of ID4 did. I have neither the boot nor the official expanded release of The Matrix, and I reckon it'll stay that way.

I did own the ID4 release and got the boot, which was good enough for a while. I had no problem, however, buying LLR's complete score release, and selling off the now obsolete OST. I'm sure I'll delete the boot from my hard drive and iPod when space becomes a premium.

[Richard Penna 2,084]

I removed everything boot and OST related as soon as I'd confirmed that LLL's set contained the genuinely entire score and important alternates. Only thing I kept was a RSNO re-recording of The Day We Fight Back.

Varese on the other hand, clearly tried to fit as many different cues on a single disc as they could, but in doing so introduced a ton of edits, which I don't expect from a 'Deluxe' edition. Between edits and bits left off, I'd have to swap in eight cues from the promo. I haven't ruled it out, but I have a hard time justifying buying the DE. Those track titles suck too.