The endless yearn (aka why do you want all of a film's music?)

[Thor 7,522]

Yeah, I saw it. Well, I think creating a suite or assembling a selection of tracks is basically the same form of adaptation. Both are designed to work as independent entities away from the film.

But enough about me and my minority preference! This topic was more about those of you who crave the whole thing. I just butted in because I felt marginalized. So I'd love to read more reasons for WHY you want the whole thing (and in the order of the film).

[Datameister 2,044]

I definitely approach this on a case-by-case (and sometimes day-by-day) basis. Complete scores can definitely be tiring, especially if they're long, repetitive, and/or bland at times. What initially drew me to the idea of complete releases was not the idea of having every single note, but the simple fact that I was missing music that I loved. Most OST albums are missing a scattering of true highlights, a fair amount of reasonably good material, and a scattering of cues that would absolutely harm the listening experience. The fact that those highlights were missing was unacceptable to me.

Nowadays, I am a bit more of a true completist, simply because I'm really into the art of film scoring, much more so than the art of album production. So while an OST can often suffice - and sometimes it's exactly what the doctor ordered - I greatly appreciate having the opportunity to decide for myself. That's why (although I hate paying more money) I support the decision to include remastered versions of the OST on complete releases by La-La Land and the like. It allows me to very easily choose how I want to enjoy the score on a day-by-day basis. I can either have a soundtrack or a film score, depending on what I'm in the mood for.

Regarding those specific TWOK cues, I find them unnecessary but still enjoyable. Themes and consonance aren't necessary for music to be good. But TWOK's complete release was necessary because of other unreleased cues, not those, IMO. (Plus the sound quality issues, of course.)

[Salacius 7]

I almost never listen to full releases. I am with you on that one.

I find original albums to be far more enjoyable to listen to. Williams has a real gift (or had when vinyl allowed you to put only a few tracks on a single disc) in creating great flowing albums. Can't think of a better example than ET, perfect.

I try to listen to full releases, they are just boring me after a while, but the great thing is that one can dig out a real gem once in a while that didn't exist on the original release.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Well, I think it's the same thing with adapting a film's score to a self-sufficient musical "tone poem" (or concept album) on CD. A film score is also a 'whole work' in the film, and needs to become another 'whole work' on album. Two different media, two different expressions. But based on the same material. Just as a book-to-film.

I don't fully agree with your analogy here, Thor. Taking a film score away from the film and "adapting" it into an album is more like taking a book and adapting it into a short story, rather than a film.

I understand your viewpoint in general, on the matter, and completely accept it, but I think it's easier for others to understand that you just want the highlights. The parts of the whole that make for a shorter, cohesive experience in its own right. Unless, of course, I'm completely misunderstanding your viewpoint.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

I understand your viewpoint in general, on the matter, and completely accept it, but I think it's easier for others to understand that you just want the highlights. The parts of the whole that make for a shorter, cohesive experience in its own right. Unless, of course, I'm completely misunderstanding your viewpoint.

The thing is that Thor doesn't even want "just the highlights". He want an abridged version of the score. That's it. He doesn't care if only one highlight is in there, as long as he thinks the album makes for a satisfying listening experience. At least that's what I understand.

[Thor 7,522]

I understand your viewpoint in general, on the matter, and completely accept it, but I think it's easier for others to understand that you just want the highlights. The parts of the whole that make for a shorter, cohesive experience in its own right. Unless, of course, I'm completely misunderstanding your viewpoint.

The thing is that Thor doesn't even want "just the highlights". He want an abridged version of the score. That's it. He doesn't care if only one highlight is in there, as long as he thinks the album makes for a satisfying listening experience. At least that's what I understand.

Actually, that's a common misconception. I don't want 'abridged' just for the sake of 'abridged'. Length is really irrelevant, and the abridged thing is more a consequence than a goal in itself. Re-organizing also means weeding out certain bits that the artist doesn't feel fit in with the desired re-conceptualization. But you can have excellent albums that run 70+ minutes, as long as it has been presented with the listening experience in mind (scores that are chockful of themes and highlights and self-contained setpieces usually justify such lengths).

But you're right about the fact that I don't really care what music is left off as long as what I hold in my hands works as it is.

[Ricard 2,245]

It's part of the SCORE's narrative and I want my film music to stick close to that

Any other kind of "highlights compilation" is extremely subjective, and producing an album is NOT really part of a film composer's job, since most of them are terrible album producers regardless of what Thor or anyone else says.

Of course film music isn't meant to be released outside a film. But if you do it, hire someone who's REALLY capable of creating a good "compilation". Otherwise release the damn full score.

And YES, most official-incomplete score releases are frustratingly BAD.

The Emperor is naked but there will always be those who will never see it.

PS: I have been listening/collecting film music albums since the early 70s. So many "wonderful" releases from those decades, especially the 80s (Goonies, BTTF, Gremlins) WOW those were "well produced OST albums". Not to mention the Williams-produced 40-minute OSTs from his early 80s masterpieces. To those who were too young to remember, or weren't even born back then, believe me: that was frustration at its best.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

PS: I have been listening/collecting film music albums since the early 70s. So many "wonderful" releases from those decades, especially the 80s (Goonies, BTTF, Gremlins) WOW those were "well produced OST albums". Not to mention the Williams-produced 40-minute OSTs from his early 80s masterpieces. To those who were too young to remember, or weren't even born back then, believe me: that was frustration at its best.

You are resorting to an extreme position, Ricard. Are there no original releases that are still superior to the complete ones?

But it would have been nice to read some of your views as well, i.e. WHY you want all the music from the film etc.

You're right, I did very little to explain my position. I get the feeling that a lot of members suffer a knee-jerk rejection at the mere mention of shorter releases (see Ricard's post above mine). It's almost like one has to be crazy to want less of a good thing -- even if the trimmed quantity makes for a more satisfying bite.

However, you are doing a better job than I could in defending our position. I subscribe every word of your posts (except for the point that a complete Star Wars is too massive -- I bet we would disagree on many specific examples, but the spirit is the same) for an alternate view of film music enjoyment.

I personally think that there are several adventitious factors that shape the average film music fan to want more music:

1) The memory of years of frustration. This goes beyond missing specific cues in certain releases -- I mean the sense of alienation of hearing a score we love and believe we are familiar with behave differently in its complete form. In other words, no matter how much you loved the original Raiders album, the whole score has other traits, flavors and tonalities enriching it and you can't possibly get them and be a part of your personal relationship with the album.

2) Unreleased tracks are good conversation topics. Ever since the Internet brought us together, we have found it is quite boring to just state our appreciation for a cue or a theme or a score. You can only do for so long and for so many times. So, as legions of film music fans saw themselves in one perpetual conversation with strangers with whom they only shared their passion (and since new film music isn't as exciting as it used to be), a culture of discussing unreleased music and how to obtain it was also born.

3) Quantity is a selling point. Some fans were prompted to legally release all those tracks and, for the last couple of years, we have lived a Golden Age of complete soundtrack releases. This not only kept feeding the online culture of unreleased music, but also prompted the mentality of "the more music, the better the release." If we don't want the new music bad enough, the label may not hear us and we'll be back to the frustration of my first point.

So in this interaction amongst ourselves and the labels, we tend to focus on the easier-to-discuss aspect of film music collecting: quantity, availability, how to edit by the numbers... It seems as if the listening experience -- which is so abstract that it's hard to verbalize -- was something we've kept to ourselves.

Don't get me wrong. Collecting is fun and it keeps the hobby and the forums and the labels alive. But it does make it look like we are just here for the tracks, when we used to be here for the music.

[Ricard 2,245]

You are resorting to an extreme position, Ricard. Are there no original releases that are still superior to the complete ones?

Of course there are always exceptions. So?

[Thor 7,522]

It's part of the SCORE's narrative and I want my film music to stick close to that

That's fine. To each their own. As I mentioned earlier, your way of appreciating soundtracks is no less or more valid than mine. We just have very different entrance point into the "hobby". But it's very interesting to hear why we feel the way we do.

Any other kind of "highlights compilation" is extremely subjective, and producing an album is NOT really part of a film composer's job, since most of them are terrible album producers regardless of what Thor or anyone else says.

That depends on the person producing it, I guess. But in my experience, there are extremely few albums produced with listening experience in mind that don't do what they're supposed to. And it's the subjective part of it that makes it so worthwhile to me -- just as I like a filmmaker to make his subjective, PERSONAL film or an artist to make his subjective, PERSONAL painting for me to enjoy (or not), and then I can interpret it whichever way I want from that. Subjectivity is the core aspect of art.

In a related note, that's one of my beefs with many liner notes. They are chockful of more "objective" details about the production, the names, the connections, the dates, the nuts-and-bolts. Which is fine and dandy, but I vastly prefer more SUBJECTIVE interpretations of what the the music is or alternatively what it does in the given scene. At least in the latter sense, it could be useful should I decide to watch the film again at some point.

But I'm glad I found a soul mate in you, Elmo Lewis! Helps me to feel not so quite alone.

[Faleel 5,363]

In a related note, that's one of my beefs with many liner notes. They are chockful of more "objective" details about the production, the names, the connections, the dates, the nuts-and-bolts. Which is fine and dandy, but I vastly prefer more SUBJECTIVE interpretations of what the the music is or alternatively what it does in the given scene. At least in the latter sense, it could be useful should I decide to watch the film again at some point.

"The music goes really high and happy and makes you feel like your walking on air, while taking drugs"

[Trent B 337]

I'm not sure which one to vote for. However, if there is a film I liked and especially the score then I will try my best to track it down and hope there's a complete version of it out there.

Air Force One

Back To The Future Trilogy

Batman

Dinosaur

Die Hard

Fantastic 4: Rise Of The Silver Surfer

Godzilla

Home Alone (first one)

Hook

Independence Day

Jurassic Park III

Spider-Man 3

Star Trek (2009)

Star Trek : The Motion Picture

Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan

Star Trek III: The Search For Spock

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country

Star Trek: Generations

Star Trek: Insurrection

Star Trek: Nemesis

Star Wars Saga

The Matrix Trilogy

The Mummy

The Mummy Returns

Twister

X-Men: The Last Stand

That is the list of all my top favorite scores. Grant most of them are in complete form and have been released by the labels or are in bootleg form. These are the ones I generally listen to the most out of anything else in my collection.

I know when Back To The Future was announced by Intrada, I really jumped up and down and screamed for joy. I was overly excited by it as I was told it was coming from them but not sure exactly when. This along with Independence Day actually have been my top two favorite releases from the labels.

Anyways as I said if there's a film I like and the score is really good and catches my attention then I strive to look for a complete version.

[Thor 7,522]

In a related note, that's one of my beefs with many liner notes. They are chockful of more "objective" details about the production, the names, the connections, the dates, the nuts-and-bolts. Which is fine and dandy, but I vastly prefer more SUBJECTIVE interpretations of what the the music is or alternatively what it does in the given scene. At least in the latter sense, it could be useful should I decide to watch the film again at some point.

"The music goes really high and happy and makes you feel like your walking on air, while taking drugs"

It should preferably not be written by comment contributors from youtube!

[Romão 2,274]

If you listen to a cd to relieve a movie's narrative, you will never judge it on purely musical terms, And that's all that matters when one pops the cd in the stereo. I only care how the music works within the film when I'm actually watching it.

I agree with Thor and Elmo, film music has to be adapted to a different medium. For the most part, the structure of a film is actually a musical enemy. It forces rushed developments, unecessary timings, premature resolutions, all sort of things. It is not dictated by the composer. In many ways, it's like if the composer was asked to adapt one of his symphonies to a movie.

Vaughan Williams never released his original Scott of the Antartic score, prefering to adapt it and present it in the form a symphony (although it is probably more of a tone poem). Prokofiev turned his Alexander Nevsky into a Cantata. A composer, when writing a score, controls many things in his music, but there is one crucial element that is totally out of his control: tempo. Williams has mentioned this often. I tend to view film scores has being tone poems inspired by the subject of the movie, but where the composer can present the story, its atmosphere and feelings at his own rythm, presenting the themes prematurely (relative to the narrative of the film, that is) and trying to make up the most he can for his limitation in the choice of tempos.

It's a oft-mentioned example, but you really can't beat the original ET album. All the extra music is brilliant music, of course, and I'm glad we have it, but it actually detracts from the overall listening experience. That original ET album is a true symphonic work

[Brónach 1,302]

If you listen to a cd to relieve a movie's narrative, you will never judge it on purely musical terms, And that's all that matters when one pops the cd in the stereo.

1) We listen to the CD because we like the music, mainly.

2) Even if we listened to the music to remind ourselves of how much we like a film*, speak for yourself. With all the music in order you can truly appreciate it's musical qualities.

*Which we do sometimes, as well!

[Thor 7,522]

If you listen to a cd to relieve a movie's narrative, you will never judge it on purely musical terms, And that's all that matters when one pops the cd in the stereo. I only care how the music works within the film when I'm actually watching it.

I agree with Thor and Elmo, film music has to be adapted to a different medium. For the most part, the structure of a film is actually a musical enemy. It forces rushed developments, unecessary timings, premature resolutions, all sort of things. It is not dictated by the composer. In many ways, it's like if the composer was asked to adapt one of his symphonies to a movie.

Vaughan Williams never released his original Scott of the Antartic score, prefering to adapt it and present it in the form a symphony (although it is probably more of a tone poem). Prokofiev turned his Alexander Nevsky into a Cantata. A composer, when writing a score, controls many things in his music, but there is one crucial element that is totally out of his control: tempo. Williams has mentioned this often. I tend to view film scores has being tone poems inspired by the subject of the movie, but where the composer can present the story, its atmosphere and feelings at his own rythm, presenting the themes prematurely (relative to the narrative of the film, that is) and trying to make up the most he can for his limitation in the choice of tempos.

It's a oft-mentioned example, but you really can't beat the original ET album. All the extra music is brilliant music, of course, and I'm glad we have it, but it actually detracts from the overall listening experience. That original ET album is a true symphonic work

Very well put!

[Brónach 1,302]

Yeah, well put, only based on a flawed assumption!

[Thor 7,522]

Yeah, well put, only based on a flawed assumption!

Please, none of that. Let's not antagonize each other. Both viewpoints are equally valid, and simply mirror how you became interested in soundtrack listening in the first place. The value of such threads is finding out the rationale, background and reasons for our different preferences, not so say that one is more right than the other; or that one is more "flawed" etc.

[Incanus 5,716]

Yeah, well put, only based on a flawed assumption!

Please, none of that. Let's not antagonize each other. Both viewpoints are equally valid, and simply mirror how you became interested in soundtrack listening in the first place. The value of such threads is finding out the rationale, background and reasons for our different preferences, not so say that one is more right than the other; or that one is more "flawed" etc.

Yes. Very level headedly put!

It is actually very interesting to read all the rationales people have to the way they experience film and other music even if I do not necessarily subscribe to those same ideas.

I found it also a fascinating phenomenon that many people listen to film scores as pure albums as any music. I consider the story to be integral part of the music in film scores since it is the source from which the music springs from. At times I have admit I do not know a whif about the film but I can very well enjoy the score album as pure music but for film music the story is part of its nature, to know it is to know the heart of it, all the complecities and gestures. Music can affect you without any copious backstory to it as well, I can't deny that but I just want to bring this aspect and way of thinking into the discussion. When you have listened to film music for a long time you can easily read narrative on musical terms alone as a alot of it is convention but to know the actual context brings often an intellectual level to the music that complements the emotional one. Again this is not all pervasive but it is for me a very important part of music. I certainly won't call it dissecting the music since it is not pure intellectual process of dividing music to its constituent parts but making observations on the music's inner relations often enhances the listening experience for me since it often relates to the story. Some could call this unimaginative since you are searching for a ready and available answer to the meaning of the music instead of providing it yourself but I see it more as trying to understand the music better. This perhaps leads to my love and need to hear certain scores in their full form, to truly get from point A to point B to point C and finally to point D so that I can hear how the music tells the story in its entirety. Some passages might cut the musicality of the flow every now and then but those are still all integral parts of the whole to me in those cases.

On the other hand I love to hear composers turn their film scores into concert pieces that basically give the music a new life of its own, reinterpret the musical material and give it time to breathe on its own terms. Good examples in Williams' catalogue are the Born on the Fourth of July Suite, The Reivers Suite, Memoirs of a Geisha Suite and Escapades (from Catch Me If You Can). This of course does not exclude my preference to hear say E.T. or Jaws or Raiders of the Lost Ark complete in their chronological order which I find more satisfying because all my favourite music is there even if the composer might not prefer to have them there. Nor does it mean that I can't enjoy those respective soundtrack albums which I also think to be satisfying listening experiences in a different way.

Oh and the re-recording OSTs made by e.g. Williams and Goldsmith in the 70s are a great example where the music has found a new and satisfying form in a reinterpretation. The performances are often more powerful than the OSTs and the musical material adapted and reworked into a new form gives a rounded listening experience. Still I consider the C&C presentation of e.g. The Fury equally engaging as the re-recording.

[Romão 2,274]

I do have to add that some scores work wonderfully on a CC presentation. The Star Wars OT comes to mind, as do the Indy scores (although I still think, as wonderful as the extra music is, that the original TOD was superior).

Hook will work wonderfully in a CC presentation. The complete score is so episodic anyway, so no track feels redudant or secondary

[crocodile 8,020]

Yeah, well put, only based on a flawed assumption!

Please, none of that. Let's not antagonize each other. Both viewpoints are equally valid, and simply mirror how you became interested in soundtrack listening in the first place. The value of such threads is finding out the rationale, background and reasons for our different preferences, not so say that one is more right than the other; or that one is more "flawed" etc.

Yes. Very level headedly put!

Seconded!

I actually like short score albums. Not because I wouldn't want to hear the rest, but because for most film music works, 50 minute album is good enough. But then again, there are some of them which simply don't work.

BTW, Thor. Is there are any longer score you can think of that you'd rather hear as complete as possible? You know, if the short album doesn't work for one reason or another.

Karol

[Elmo Lewis 6]

If you listen to a cd to relieve a movie's narrative, you will never judge it on purely musical terms, And that's all that matters when one pops the cd in the stereo. I only care how the music works within the film when I'm actually watching it.

I agree with Thor and Elmo, film music has to be adapted to a different medium. For the most part, the structure of a film is actually a musical enemy. It forces rushed developments, unecessary timings, premature resolutions, all sort of things. It is not dictated by the composer. In many ways, it's like if the composer was asked to adapt one of his symphonies to a movie.

Vaughan Williams never released his original Scott of the Antartic score, prefering to adapt it and present it in the form a symphony (although it is probably more of a tone poem). Prokofiev turned his Alexander Nevsky into a Cantata. A composer, when writing a score, controls many things in his music, but there is one crucial element that is totally out of his control: tempo. Williams has mentioned this often. I tend to view film scores has being tone poems inspired by the subject of the movie, but where the composer can present the story, its atmosphere and feelings at his own rythm, presenting the themes prematurely (relative to the narrative of the film, that is) and trying to make up the most he can for his limitation in the choice of tempos.

It's a oft-mentioned example, but you really can't beat the original ET album. All the extra music is brilliant music, of course, and I'm glad we have it, but it actually detracts from the overall listening experience. That original ET album is a true symphonic work

[Incanus 5,716]

By a comparison, which would you prefer, the Nutcracker Ballet by Tchaikovsky or the Nutcracker Suite?

[pixie_twinkle 48]

I'd like to be able to decide for myself which tracks are worth listening to outside of the movie and which aren't. Therefore I'd really like all soundtrack releases to be as complete as possible. If I really thought the score wasn't that interesting I won't buy the CD. Simple as that.

[crocodile 8,020]

By a comparison, which would you prefer, the Nutcracker Ballet by Tchaikovsky or the Nutcracker Suite?

By the way, have you listened to complete & chronological LSO re-recording of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet?

Karol

[Incanus 5,716]

I'd like to be able to decide for myself which tracks are worth listening to outside of the movie and which aren't. Therefore I'd really like all soundtrack releases to be as complete as possible. If I really thought the score wasn't that interesting I won't buy the CD. Simple as that.

Yes that would be optimal to some, me included. Others would probably be annoyed that they would have to choose instead of having the composer provide them with a listening experience.

By a comparison, which would you prefer, the Nutcracker Ballet by Tchaikovsky or the Nutcracker Suite?

By the way, have you listened to complete & chronological LSO re-recording of Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet?

Karol

No I actually haven't. One of those cases where I really should delve more into Prokofiev's music. Do you recommend it?

[crocodile 8,020]

Yup. It's really cool. I'm going to see the performance of some sections of the ballet on Wednesday (along with Tchaikovsky's violin concerto and Rachmaninov's first) so bought myself this recording and it kicks ass. And it is one of the few complete performances of the ballet.

Karol

[Ricard 2,245]

Original soundtrack recordings aren't written/recorded to be heard in abridged form and out of sequence. Re-recordings and concert suites are.

Editing, shortening and re-sequencing a score in order to create a supposedly better "listening experience" is such a ridiculously artificial task that it necessarily fails in at least 90% of the cases. That's why some Williams produced albums "work" partially (thanks to the concert arrangements) or entirely (some of his re-recordings from the 70s).

Regarding the highly overrated original E.T. LP: I'm fully aware that I'm in the minority, but I've always found it to be a completely unsatisfying (and again, very frustrating) "listening experience" since the moment it was released. The 1996 and 2002 releases were a blessing in that regard.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Original soundtrack recordings aren't written/recorded to be heard in abridged form and out of sequence. Re-recordings and concert suites are.

But they are published to be listened to on their own. There is a difference. And let's not forget that not all movies reserve some budget for the score to be re-recorded in suite form.

Editing, shortening and re-sequencing a score in order to create a supposedly better "listening experience" is such a ridiculously artificial task that it necessarily fails in at least 90% of the cases. That's why some Williams produced albums "work" partially (thanks to the concert arrangements) or entirely (some of his re-recordings from the 70s).

Whether it fails or not is subjective, as has been the focus of many posts in this thread. But the intentions behind the "listening experience" arrangement are quite sound: filmic logic doesn't necessarily mean musical logic. Just as a journalist should never tell a story in chronological order (because it's hardly the most interesting one), an album producer can find certain cues placed in different order to pasted together create a better flow on their own.

It can sound jarring because this precisely film music. Separating it from the feel of the film can be unnatural because in a lot of cases, we are exposed to the music through the film and our mind tends to recreate that. And a lot of us want to re-experience the film through the music more than listen to the music itself. I find that this approach denies the score an opportunity to express itself musically. A cue written for a scene late into the film can be a great introduction to a theme or a musical idea (if "Binary Sunset" had been written for a moment later in Star Wars, would you argue against placing it early in the score?). The first 30 minutes of score might not have much musical interest. Or maybe the last 30 minutes.

Regarding the highly overrated original E.T. LP: I'm fully aware that I'm in the minority, but I've always found it to be a completely unsatisfying (and again, very frustrating) "listening experience" since the moment it was released. The 1996 and 2002 releases were a blessing in that regard.

I just pray for a day when we can get past the years of frustration and denial and focus on the music itself.

[fommes 153]

I've recently realized that there's indeed a certain myth (probably instigated by nostalgia) that Williams's older albums were all of them great, while his album arrangements nowadays are more hit 'n' miss.

In fact, they weren't always so great back then either. E.T. is one of the clearest example of this. Its reputation comes no doubt from the separate concert pieces - which are truly great - but the order doesn't make much sense (yes, musically): in the second half of the album, for instance, there's a lot of repetition of some particular music & melodies - e.g. concert pieces that were based on a given track, followed by that very track. All of that while the first half is reasonably varied. It's an at times very uneven listening experience, and I much prefer my 'alternate' version with the OST tracks and some alternates of the film score added.

[Brónach 1,302]

Yeah, well put, only based on a flawed assumption!

Please, none of that. Let's not antagonize each other. Both viewpoints are equally valid, and simply mirror how you became interested in soundtrack listening in the first place. The value of such threads is finding out the rationale, background and reasons for our different preferences, not so say that one is more right than the other; or that one is more "flawed" etc.

My scientific education makes it weird for me that different viewpoints with different conclusions and rationales and premises and everything are all equally acceptable. Surely one of them has got to have a more precise methodology or premises or something. But I guess this is how it is for most people. I didn't mean to fight or anything, just regular thinking and sounding funny. Sorry if I bothered someone.

and simply mirror how you became interested in soundtrack listening in the first place.

I find this very interesting, actually.

I have to admit, I'm always been very interested in some types of music you seem to enjoy very much, like proggressive rock and electronic music and ambient music and that (unsure about the correct terms). I'd hear stuff here and there and go "ok that's cool!" but I never actually got into it.

Although I'm afraid that, if I got into that, I would go insane with my completist mentality of a film score fan. But who knows.

My interest in film score comes from two different tastes: my premature appreciation for orchestral music (non-film), and the films of my childhood. I guess at some point it just overlapped, and afterwards I started to listen to scores for films I hadn't already seen. I also like jazzy scores.

With my interest for film score coming from these two angles, it was only natural that I would find the logical presentation of a film score to be complete and chronological, and with the composition preceding the film editing in importance.

This went further when I sort of experienced what Ricard says, of not being able to listen to music you want on its own, and when I started to listen to film scores for film I hadn't seen or had no interest to see (I could be missing out music).

So naturally I became interested too in original concert compositions based on film scores by the composers themselves, as this would be like a sequel to a score I liked. I specially like this if it isn't just a reprise of material from the score, but a new development, with new orchestrations, or melodies or something.

[Henry B 50]

But I agree with you regarding the 'valid' thing. Both ways are very valid ways of appreciating soundtracks, opposites though they are. Unfortunately, we can't have both. But it's still fascinating to try and understand why people feel the way they do. I've done quite a few posts here trying to explain some of the rationale and background for my preference (and I KNOW this annoys the moderators, who would rather have me shut up about it). But it would have been nice to read some of your views as well, i.e. WHY you want all the music from the film etc.

Except we usually can have both. Almost no score is released C&C the first time, and often expanded releases, especially these days, include the original album assembly too for only $5 or so more.

[Thor 7,522]

BTW, Thor. Is there are any longer score you can think of that you'd rather hear as complete as possible? You know, if the short album doesn't work for one reason or another.

Not necessarily complete, but there are definitely scores I wish got an expanded release -- especially those that only have one or a couple of score cues on the soundtrack, which aren't remotely representative of the whole score. GREMLINS comes to mind. That deserves a good, proper release beyond the score/song combo soundtrack. In fact, I believe one is forthcoming? Same situation with Colombier's THE GOLDEN CHILD, which recently got a more full release. Love that.

My interest in film score comes from two different tastes: my premature appreciation for orchestral music (non-film), and the films of my childhood. I guess at some point it just overlapped, and afterwards I started to listen to scores for films I hadn't already seen. I also like jazzy scores.

Yes, I think the crux of our difference lies there. I came to soundtracks through instrumental electronic music, prog rock and other kinds of concept albums. I had a suspicion that soundtracks were quite similiar, and after having copied the TWIN PEAKS soundtrack from CD to cassette, found out that they were indeed! (of course I'm a film buff too and obviously interested in how music worked there, but that was and is a whole other ballgame that didn't have anything to do with my soundtrack interest).

Anyways, I started collecting soundtracks throughout the 90's and into the 2000's -- both for films I had seen and not. It didn't really matter. The music was the thing. For many years, I felt very alone, but then the internet opened up a whole other arena for me, as I'm sure it did for others. In the early 2000's, as niche labels started to crop up and release C&C presentations all over the place, that took me by complete surprise. I didn't realize that people were listening to soundtracks that way. For me, you guys were the "odd ones". I didn't understand that there were other ways to appreciate soundtracks than the way I did; that was more 'film-centric', perhaps. Of course, this changed as I realized not only were there people who preferred them that way, but they were -- in fact -- the MAJORITY. And I was the minority. I remember creating this FSM thread back in 2000, one of my earliest critiques of the C&C:

http://www.filmscore...mID=1&archive=0

It took me some time to get used to the idea, but now I realize that's how it is and there's nothing I can do about it, other than to "air my discontent" now and then.

So that's my story. I think that should explain the difference of opinion.

[Ricard 2,245]

Original soundtrack recordings aren't written/recorded to be heard in abridged form and out of sequence. Re-recordings and concert suites are.

But they are published to be listened to on their own.

But they don't make musical sense out of sequence because they didn't mean to in the first place.

Editing, shortening and re-sequencing a score in order to create a supposedly better "listening experience" is such a ridiculously artificial task that it necessarily fails in at least 90% of the cases. That's why some Williams produced albums "work" partially (thanks to the concert arrangements) or entirely (some of his re-recordings from the 70s).

Whether it fails or not is subjective, as has been the focus of many posts in this thread. But the intentions behind the "listening experience" arrangement are quite sound: filmic logic doesn't necessarily mean musical logic. Just as a journalist should never tell a story in chronological order (because it's hardly the most interesting one), an album producer can find certain cues placed in different order to pasted together create a better flow on their own.

Apples and oranges. I laugh every time I read the term "musical logic" when it comes to FILM MUSIC. Film music has a logic on its own, since it was primarily created for a FILM. And that logic is way more complex than that of most other musical genres.

Music written for a scene late into the film can be a great introduction to a theme or a musical idea (if "Binary Sunset" had been written for a moment later in Star Wars, would you argue against placing it early in the score?).

Yes I would.

The first 30 minutes of score might not have much musical interest. Or maybe the last 30 minutes.

What in the world is "musical interest"? A variation of "musical logic"?

Regarding the highly overrated original E.T. LP: I'm fully aware that I'm in the minority, but I've always found it to be a completely unsatisfying (and again, very frustrating) "listening experience" since the moment it was released. The 1996 and 2002 releases were a blessing in that regard.

I just pray for a day when we can get past the years of frustration and denial and focus on the music itself.

I've been focusing on the music since day one. I played those LPs hundreds of times, always enjoying every second. ADDITIONALLY I had to listen to the "bootleg" recordings I made in the cinema on a radio-cassette hidden inside a plastic bag. Hence my frustration. These are my teenage memories and they will be stuck in my head and my heart for the rest of my life.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

Editing, shortening and re-sequencing a score in order to create a supposedly better "listening experience" is such a ridiculously artificial task that it necessarily fails in at least 90% of the cases. That's why some Williams produced albums "work" partially (thanks to the concert arrangements) or entirely (some of his re-recordings from the 70s).

Whether it fails or not is subjective, as has been the focus of many posts in this thread. But the intentions behind the "listening experience" arrangement are quite sound: filmic logic doesn't necessarily mean musical logic. Just as a journalist should never tell a story in chronological order (because it's hardly the most interesting one), an album producer can find certain cues placed in different order to pasted together create a better flow on their own.

Apples and oranges. I laugh every time I read the term "musical logic" when it comes to FILM MUSIC. Film music has a logic on its own, since it was primarily created for a FILM. And that logic is way more complex than that of most other musical genres.

I'm not going to pretend I am the music expert I am not, but I trust my ears. And I hear a logic in Jaws (I keep bringing it up because, to me, that's the perfect release) that transcends the film it belongs to. So I am going to assume that, through what you perceive as maiming and butchering, you can reinvent film music to have a meaning of its own, away from the impositions of the film it primarily serves. For argument's sake I am going to keep on calling it "musical logic", for lack of a better term.

(Just for the record, I don't find such cohesion in longer releases like, say, Minority Report, which I strongly believe could be better album with less music in it, or the more album-friendly Memoirs of a Geisha -- and it's not a perception based on nostalgia, as I also loved Gerhardt's versions of the Star Wars trilogy long after I had memorized the 1997 editions.)

You talk of a different, complex logic born out of the osmosis between the images and the music. I don't deny such a thing could exist. But it's not necessarily a good thing. Take a mickey-mousing score for instance -- it is not pleasant to listen on its own. It is complex, technical and logically, and a challenging listen, but that doesn't make it engrossing. Putting it in order and expanding is not going to fix that. However, if you cut the least interesting bits and rearrange what you're left with, you may have something better here.

We tend to believe we can improve the work of others the minute we can supervise it. If we saw a literary editor cutting and rephrasing an author's text, we would also be tempted to say that they do a horrible job, no matter how professional his criteria. I'm not saying, of course, that a professional editor is the ultimate authority on this matter. But in the case of film music, the situation is aggravated because we have access to the missing music, which taunts us with its inaccessibility. I fear that can make us instinctively under-appreciate what we do have.

[OneBuckFilms 324]

I'd say it is important to this release as the release is targetted as a complete release.

This cue is also a moment of suspense, and is a part of the narrative of the score and the film.

The Album arrangement is a great album, but complete should mean, essentially complete.

[Hlao-roo 389]

"Endless Yearn" would be a great name for a band.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Nah. It would be a great name for a label releasing only complete scores.

[Brónach 1,302]

You talk of a different, complex logic born out of the osmosis between the images and the music. I don't deny such a thing could exist. But it's not necessarily a good thing. Take a mickey-mousing score for instance -- it is not pleasant to listen on its own. It is complex, technical and logically, and a challenging listen, but that doesn't make it engrossing. Putting it in order and expanding is not going to fix that. However, if you cut the least interesting bits and rearrange what you're left with, you may have something better here.

I think what you want is basically something that's not "long" and that is easy to listen. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

That's an extremely reductionist, yet not incorrect, way to look at it.

I don't want accessibility per se (I'm a sucker for Williams' less brassy scores), but I do dread redundancy and poor presentations.

[Brónach 1,302]

Bingo.

The ones I find to be challenging sometimes are the mickey-mousing scores and parts of the brassy ones. I love them for that.

For me, if it's long, it's long, and if it's difficult to listen to, then that's way it is.

[Elmo Lewis 6]

I must not have explained myself very well.

[Thor 7,522]

For me, if it's long, it's long...

That's what SHE said...

[Hlao-roo 389]

This is kind of random, but I'd love to see a thread with Ricard, Thor, and Morn (remember him?) all going at it. They'd probably break the "Quote" button several times over.

[Jay 37,374]

"Endless Yearn" would be a great name for a band.

Nah. It would be a great name for a label releasing only complete scores.

:lol:

[Thor 7,522]

This is kind of random, but I'd love to see a thread with Ricard, Thor, and Morn (remember him?) all going at it. They'd probably break the "Quote" button several times over.

Ricard and I actually had some good one-on-ones in the chat room of his early Yahoo Group "Heroic Film Music" or my own "The Soundtrack Club" back in 1998, although I can't remember if we discussed the C&C issue very much. This was before that became a "thing", after all. Good times!

[Ricard 2,245]

I'm not going to pretend I am the music expert I am not, but I trust my ears. And I hear a logic in Jaws (I keep bringing it up because, to me, that's the perfect release) that transcends the film it belongs to.

The original Jaws album is a re-recording. Not the best possible listening experience, but not a bad one either. Williams' own 13-minute suite (as found in the two Williams/Spielberg compilations) flows much better when listened as a whole, in my opinion, than his original album. I love concert suites, of any length. But they are concert performance-driven re-arrangements, not part of the film itself.

I also loved Gerhardt's versions of the Star Wars trilogy long after I had memorized the 1997 editions.)

I like the performances but I find the sequencing to be mediocre. Except for the Star Wars suite which is Williams' own creation (plus Gerhardt's 'Here They Come!"). Williams creates perfect suites, and some good album re-recordings (although he abandoned this practice many years ago). But he's not as good at selecting his own cues for the OSTs. Again, IMO.

Take a mickey-mousing score for instance -- it is not pleasant to listen on its own. It is complex, technical and logically, and a challenging listen, but that doesn't make it engrossing.

What??? I LOVE mickey-mousing! It's one of the main reasons why I like film music! And I'm sure most film music fans would share this feeling.

Putting it in order and expanding is not going to fix that. However, if you cut the least interesting bits and rearrange what you're left with, you may have something better here.

"Least interesting bits"? What kind of scientific formula provides the "least interesting bits"?

We tend to believe we can improve the work of others the minute we can supervise it. If we saw a literary editor cutting and rephrasing an author's text, we would also be tempted to say that they do a horrible job, no matter how professional his criteria. I'm not saying, of course, that a professional editor is the ultimate authority on this matter. But in the case of film music, the situation is aggravated because we have access to the missing music, which taunts us with its inaccessibility. I fear that can make us instinctively under-appreciate what we do have.

I think that's a twisted assumption on your part, which of course I do not share at all.

You know what I think the difference is between the two main "sides"? I think there are those who like film music and those who like music which happens to appear in a film. THAT is the real difference.

Ricard and I actually had some good one-on-ones in the chat room of his early Yahoo Group "Heroic Film Music" or my own "The Soundtrack Club" back in 1998, although I can't remember if we discussed the C&C issue very much. This was before that became a "thing", after all. Good times!

YES!

[Thor 7,522]

You know what I think the difference is between the two main "sides"? I think there are those who like film music and those who like music which happens to appear in a film. THAT is the real difference.

I think that's a good way to look at it. For me, the source of the music is really irrelevant.

[Romão 2,274]

That's a good point, Ricard, and I'd definitely include myself in the second group

[Elmo Lewis 6]

You know what I think the difference is between the two main "sides"? I think there are those who like film music and those who like music which happens to appear in a film. THAT is the real difference.

The source of the music is not irrelevant to me. The "brand" of the movie plays a part in the experience. Also, music written for film tends to hold no stops, to be expressive, to be boldly emotional. It's deep-rooted and visceral. More so than a lot of other orchestral genres.

It's irresistible.