Bad editing in E.T.

[Faleel 5,349]

actually it is an edit because it was two (or three) different takes edited into one whole track

[The Dark Trilogy 39]

actually it is an edit because it was two (or three) different takes edited into one whole track

Ok, if it is that so, then the Anthology is edited well.

But wait! I wanted to know it directly, so I decided to put the DVD in my player and tadaa! You can also hear the edit in the film, presented on the 2CD. So this one is a film cut (in this case =edit)! Or not so well edited in the post-production in 1983.

Can anyone confirm my thesis, too?

[Faleel 5,349]

actually it is an edit because it was two (or three) different takes edited into one whole track

Ok, if it is that so, then the Anthology is edited well.

But wait! I wanted to know it directly, so I decided to put the DVD in my player and tadaa! You can also hear the edit in the film, presented on the 2CD. So this one is a film cut (in this case =edit)! Or not so well edited in the post-production in 1983.

Can anyone confirm my thesis, too?

actually the stuff in the film is taken from the edit that was was put together thats why its called a film score because the music is the same as was used in the film (besides tracking and editing)

[Nemesis 245]

I listened to the two E.T. cues (Expanded and 20th Anniversary) and oh my god! Such silly things you all argue with. I thought with "badly editing", you can hear the same issue like the album edit of 'Desert Chase'. If you curse about this one, I can understand, but that one above?

OK, you can hear a short click, but in that case that could be other reasons (errors in the mastering, e.g.). If you know the unedited cue you will notice that it is an edit. But without the comparison?

Did I mentioned a click? No.

I talked about this: Why should one cut a few seconds out of a composition to edit it together (not god either)?

I have the sheet score of the original composition. It's one cue not two cues ment to be together.

So I ask again, why should one do that?

And as you said, if you don't know the original intended version and don't have an ear for such things, then you probably never know about this failure. But if you know it, the it's just....there!

You obviously did't knew the track well before.

[Andy 4,129]

Alright, I think I found one.

On the Star Wars Anthology, Disc 4.

Departure of Boba Fett - There's a strange edit at the gong at 10:09.

This was fixed for the Special Edition release.

[The Dark Trilogy 39]

And as you said, if you don't know the original intended version and don't have an ear for such things, then you probably never know about this failure. But if you know it, the it's just....there!

You obviously did't knew the track well before.

You are right. I did not know the track very well. I've heard this "ominous" before, but I didn't think it is an editing fault. If you said the original sheet score is presented on the Expanded 1996 album, I will swap the albums. The 1996 in the shelf, the 2002 in the wall cupboard!

[Nemesis 245]

I think the other cues are okay. And it's an editing job that was done there. Listen to the moment when the strings hold the notes. At the same moment when the violins and the violas hold the notes you can hear them playing the upcoming tremolis. Are we really talking about the same thing? You said you compared the two tracks and you can hear what I meant but now you think that it isn't edited (mixed) together?

[The Dark Trilogy 39]

No, I said: I didn't think that is an edit (at first). I thought it was the bad condition of the tapes in that track. We talk about 2:28, am I correct?

After listening to both albums, I have to say that the listening experience from the 2002 album are better. The 1996 album is also good, but sometimes... I don't know... "snatchy" I would say. And I like the sound of the 2002 release. So the 1996 goes back to my wall cubboard and the 2002 stays in my shelf. And as you said, the other cues are "intact". And our "problem" cue is only a suboptimal edit. Yeah, that's it!

[Nemesis 245]

Didn't you thought the Star Wars tapes would be in bad condition? But maybe I'm mixing up something here.

Anyway, I think E.T. sounds great, both the 1996 and 2002 albums. It's a matter of taste I think which sound mixing one would like better. And yes, I meant the 2:26 mark in the cue E.T. is alive. And to my ears the sound quality is perfect, it's just the edit that annoys me

[Faleel 5,349]

this is a point when you rip the CD and replace the 2002 cue with the 1996 and maybe remaster the old cue a bit with some sort of program like soundbooth or something else

[The Dark Trilogy 39]

Didn't you thought the Star Wars tapes would be in bad condition? But maybe I'm mixing up something here.

Yes, I thought it on 'Brother and Sister' and on 'E.T. is alive'.

[Quintus 5,399]

The very first note of Return of the Jedi sounds like an edit. It sort of stutters. I'm talking about the actual cue, not the album.

[Charlie Brigden 7]

As far as I'm aware, the whole point of the Indy box is that they were expanding the already available albums - somewhat like some believe the Elfman/Burton box will be like - therefore, the original album tracks were there to be used, but they were able to add to these. The original album featured an edit of 'Desert Chase', hence this is why it's presented here. I'm not necessarily defending it, but it may have been that there may still have been some rights with the original record companies (Polydor and Warner Bros) similar to the issues with the Trek CDs for FSM, and because the budget was just for one CD per score, they couldn't afford to include the full track. The fifth disc may have potentially be an afterthought (similar to the SWA), but it still has some essential cues on there I'm glad we have.

EDIT: I wrote this thinking the first page was the only page.

[Wojo 2,453]

I would've gladly given up the 17 minute interview track for a few more key unreleased tracks from TOD and TLC. Oh well, I'm used to the warbling and crickets by now...