Does Thor have a point?

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Our fellow member Thor is famous for having a very particular stance against the complete and chronological presentation of a score for a CD release. Preferring almost always a shorter release that includes the highlights and has been arranged to maximaize the listening experience.

These views have earned him the ire of many filmscore fan. On JWFan it's not so bad, but Thor is hated by several people on FSM.

The thing is, I don't think he is wrong. He certainly is not completely right either. But his views have a point.

Unlike most types of music, film music was not written for it's own sake. There are plenty of scores that have tracks of a purely functional nature when it comes to the job of supporting the film, but have little function when removed from it.

Also when producing a CD the composer's primary job should be to delight his audience.

John Williams understands this better then most, thats why his albums have been carefully tailored to highlight the pieces HE thinks will be most fitting for a listening experience removed from the film.

Many disagree with what John does or does not include (I know I do), but it's his music, and what is on the CD is HIS artistic expression that he wants the listener to enjoy.

Discuss!

[A24 4,331]

The artist wants you to experience his music in a certain way, how he thinks it's the best representation. Who are we to say "no, that is not the right way"?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Oh, I never thought Thor was wrong for liking album presentations more than C&C ones.

The only thing I have a problem with is when he says that for every score out there, the album presentation is superior to the complete and chronological one, which is simply not true. It depends on the score.

The artist wants you to experience his music in a certain way, how he thinks it's the best representation. Who are we to say "no, that is not the right way"?

People rarely say that. Most of the time, they complain that the music presented on the album doesn't feature their favourite parts of the score.

[crocodile 8,012]

Well, in the case of film scores the complete releases have mostly archival value. It's rare that someone would spend 2 or 2.5 hours listening to one album. It's just not terribly practical. I appreciate the albums for their listenability, but also want the complete scores for my favourite works so I can go into greater detail.

Some scores work brilliantly in complete form, some do not. And it has nothing to do with their overall quality.

Karol

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

The artist wants you to experience his music in a certain way, how he thinks it's the best representation. Who are we to say "no, that is not the right way"?

Many of "us" do though. Preferring that every note be released. Often creating very long, unwieldy albums.

I suppose it's a question of "archival versus artistic" merits.

Well, in the case of film scores the complete releases have mostly archival value. It's rare that someone would spend 2 or 2.5 hours listening to one album. It's just not terribly practical.

It's why I returned to the LOTR OST's this week. I love the Complete Recordings, but simply DON'T have the time to listen to 12 hours of music

[Quintus 5,399]

It's certainly easy to appreciate Thor's standpoint and I agree with some of his basic principles, but I still think he takes his listening habits to the extreme, to the point where he seems driven by a sort of anal obsession to stick rigidly to his principles out of a zealous self belief that his way is somehow the 'proper' way. And sometimes I think he's content to cut his nose off to spite his face as a result, while - the important part - openly chastising those who don't subscribe to the ost theory. Although to be fair to the nice chap he doesn't do that so much anymore.

Can of worms officially open.

Did Stefan make this thread to ensure M. Olivarez has definitely left again?

[Brónach 1,302]

People complain that the absence of certain music and many choices in order for albums have made many scores seem worse or lesser achievements than what they actually are.

I have a problem with is when he says that for every score out there, the album presentation is superior to the complete and chronological one, which is simply not true. It depends on the score.

THIS.

There's a point in which I think Thor isn't right. He calls album producing an artform. The piece of interest is the music itself. It wasn't made in a vacuum, right, like a lot of other music we're conveniently ignoring. But I'm still yet to hear a reasonable explanation of why an original work should be altered by who-knows, often differing from the complete work because the complete work wasn't finished, and we are expected to somehow assemble albums ourselves without access to the material so we can go into the score in detail. It's total nonsense. t's riddled with circular logic and vaporous subjective justifications. If you want to listen to it, watch the movie! What?!

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Bloodball being reasonable?

I guess the Maya's were right....

[crocodile 8,012]

It's certainly easy to appreciate Thor's standpoint and I agree with some of his basic principles, but I still think he takes his listening habits to the extreme, to the point where he seems driven by a sort of anal obsession to stick rigidly to his principles out of a zealous self belief that his way is somehow the 'proper' way.

I think Thor might enjoy some of the expanded albums, if he gave them a try. Sometimes they offer such a different take on the material that it's almost necessary to have both.

Karol

[Datameister 2,042]

I see considerable merits to both approaches, with some scores leaning more toward one than the other. Condensing a film score into a soundtrack album can produce a more holistically satisfying (and temporally drawn out) experience, but it can also result in the omission of really amazing music. My choice of listening experience depends on how those two factors weigh against each other for a specific score at a specific moment in time.

For that reason, I'd prefer to always have the option of obtaining both, which places the decision in my hands. The theoretical solution I've always loved is to sell rearranged soundtrack albums just like they currently do, but include a unique code with each physical album that allows a digital download of the complete, unedited score for an appropriate additional fee. This allows the artist to put forth his or her artistic vision in the way he or she prefers, but it doesn't force listeners to seek unreleased music from other sources. It also eliminates the risk associated with traditional complete releases - after all, what do you lose if only 5% of the people who buy the album decide to download the complete score, too?

[Brónach 1,302]

I love the Complete Recordings, but simply DON'T have the time to listen to 12 hours of music

Nobody says you have to listen to it one sitting. You're constantly listening to 12 hours of music one after another. You're always listening to music. What do you mean, you don't have the time? I didn't hear you saying you didn't have time to reread The Lord of the Rings! You went in parts, right?

Length is not a sensible complain to me. Specially when it can help to avoid over listening. And the great thing is one can jump around to the prefferred parts, and the rest is still available. It'd be, of course, ridiculous to deny this possibility to everybody on the basis o that or that guy not being able to listen to it one sitting.

[Quintus 5,399]

It's not the size but what you do with it that matters, apparently.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Does Thor have a point!

No he has a hammer.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

It's not the size but what you do with it that matters, apparently.

Hehehe.

[Brónach 1,302]

There are plenty of scores that have tracks of a purely functional nature when it comes to the job of supporting the film, but have little function when removed from it.

Yes, that is why they ought to take something like The Last Airbender and simply fuck it up on album! Woohoo! Album presentation! Fiesta!

John Williams understands this better then most, thats why his albums have been carefully tailored to highlight the pieces HE thinks will be most fitting for a listening experience removed from the film.

I don't want to go on a case by case basis for John Williams, but if he's arranged his albums he's done some reaaally puzzling things that are almost legendary at this point.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

I love the Complete Recordings, but simply DON'T have the time to listen to 12 hours of music

Nobody says you have to listen to it one sitting. You're constantly listening to 12 hours of music one after another. You're always listening to music. What do you mean, you don't have the time? I didn't hear you saying you didn't have time to reread The Lord of the Rings! You went in parts, right?

Length is not a sensible complain to me. Specially when it can help to avoid over listening. And the great thing is one can jump around to the prefferred parts, and the rest is still available. It'd be, of course, ridiculous to deny this possibility to everybody on the basis o that or that guy not being able to listen to it one sitting.

This week I wanted to listen to the LOTR albums before I saw The Hobbit, and I didn't think I would have time to listen though the CR's and reach ROTK in time. And yes ofcourse I listen in sessions.

I don't want to go on a case by case basis for John Williams, but if he's arranged his albums he's done some reaaally puzzling things that are almost legendary at this point.

and yet some of his albums are brilliant. his original cut for Star Wars for example. Superman too and Close encounters, E.T. etc....

[Sandor 797]

Well, the original album presentation of E.T. is phenomenal IMO, and so is the (almost) complete 20th Anniversary edition.

It's like listening to two different presentations of the same score.

Williams is a masterful producer, with more hits than misses.

I always like what he envisiones for the presentation of his scores, but I always welcome a complete release as well.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

There are plenty of scores that have tracks of a purely functional nature when it comes to the job of supporting the film, but have little function when removed from it.

Yes, that is why they ought to take something like The Last Airbender and simply fuck it up on album! Woohoo! Album presentation! Fiesta!

lol

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Jaws, E.T., Star Wars, Close Encounters, Jaws 2, Superman, Raiders were all perfection.

ESB needed to be longer as did ROTJ.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Wasnt TESB a 2 LP job?

ROTJ was a dissapointment.

[Thor 7,503]

It's certainly easy to appreciate Thor's standpoint and I agree with some of his basic principles, but I still think he takes his listening habits to the extreme, to the point where he seems driven by a sort of anal obsession to stick rigidly to his principles out of a zealous self belief that his way is somehow the 'proper' way. And sometimes I think he's content to cut his nose off to spite his face as a result, while - the important part - openly chastising those who don't subscribe to the ost theory. Although to be fair to the nice chap he doesn't do that so much anymore.

Can of worms officially open.

Did Stefan make this thread to ensure M. Olivarez has definitely left again?

The powers-that-be here don't like that I talk about this, but I hope I can respond to a few points since the topic is being raised again.

I agree with you that I'm quite extreme in this -- probably because of the way I got interested in soundtracks in the first place -- but I'm thankfully not alone in the general preference for A&A (arranged & abbreviated) over C&C. Especially at maintitles.net, there's a more even balance of the two camps. However, I'm less driven by principles than I am by preference. I've given C&C releases a chance time and again, but have almost never liked one (except once in a blue moon, like ROCKY IV). At some point, I just had to ask myself: "What the hell am I doing? Why do I keep giving these things a chance when I just end up disliking it?". So based on such experience, it allows me to draw a general preference and opinion on the matter. Just as any other thing in life.

The other criticism is that I repeat the view all the time (although not so much anymore), and for some reason that annoys people. Well, I kept repeating it because scores that I love kept coming in that format. That kinda goes hand in hand. I want to comment when a score I love gets released, and if it gets released in a format I don't like, I'll say it. Even if it's same criticism over and over and over again. Just as if you kept serving me pizza (which I love) with sardines (which I hate), I would keep saying how the sardines ruin the taste of the pizza.

What I've never understood is why stating this preference (even repeatedly) is somehow annoying or offensive to some people. Fine, it's a different preference than your own, but so what? Where's the 'offense'? Where's the 'threat'? This bewilders me.

There's a point in which I think Thor isn't right. He calls album producing an artform. The piece of interest is the music itself. It wasn't made in a vacuum, right, like a lot of other music we're conveniently ignoring. But I'm still yet to hear a reasonable explanation of why an original work should be altered

For the record, I've never said that you should alter the music itself, i.e. the tracks themselves. Just the structure of the cues to give it as much musical meaning and fluidity as possible. That's where the TRUE artform of album production lies, IMO. Listening to a CD is not the same as seeing a film, and music works differently in the two different media. Film music is the only type of music, really, that has this weird dilemma. My opinion is that once you "switch" medium, you need to adapt it to the new medium. Just as you adapt a written text to film or whatever.

I think that's the gist of it.

[Brónach 1,302]

and yet some of his albums are brilliant. his original cut for Star Wars for example. Superman too and Close encounters, E.T. etc....

I prefer all these in complete form. Star Wars flows like bliss, Close Encounters, which I think is the better of the two just needs being complete, to get the whole anticipation and tension growing. Superman I can tolerate being shortened, well, depending of what you shorten. E.T. was a sort of remake, alternate scores are a different issue.

I constantly like listening to score in a fragmentary way and then jump around between scores. But I don't like having the shortenings imposed on me, for many reasons that I've usually found to either unrelated to artistic choices or stupid. "This magnificent orchestral swell will be unlistenable on album! I'll take it out!" Yeah, right.

[crocodile 8,012]

Jaws, E.T., Star Wars, Close Encounters, Jaws 2, Superman, Raiders were all perfection.

ESB needed to be longer as did ROTJ.

You might be quite surprised to learn this, but I never got a chance to listen to these versions. My first full exposure to this music came through RCA Victor discs.

Karol

[Jay 37,355]

The only thing I have a problem with is when he says that for every score out there, the album presentation is superior to the complete and chronological one, which is simply not true. It depends on the score.

End of discussion IMHO.

FYI everyone, this is what happened last time we tried to have a serious discussion about this topic:

http://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=19348

[Henry B 50]

Thor used to be adamant that his vision was the only correct one and condescendingly declared that people who liked C&C were only interested in recalling scenes from the movie and couldn't possibly appreciate the music on its own terms (even when it came to unused and alternate cues?).

But these days he's been saying that album is just his preference over C&C, which I think is fine. I often agree. It is also true that the album often does indeed represent the composer's wishes for listeners, whether you choose to follow them or not.

He also used to hate the business of the specialty labels and moan when a complete score was released, which seemed a little rude to the people who make their living at it. Again, though, no longer an issue.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

2 years ago. Things have changed

We have beards now Jason!

The powers-that-be here don't like that I talk about this, but I hope I can respond to a few points since the topic is being raised again.

To be honest neither Ricard or Jason have any right to tell you what to discuss as long as it does not go against Forum rules.

What I've never understood is why stating this preference (even repeatedly) is somehow annoying or offensive to some people. Fine, it's a different preference than your own, but so what? Where's the 'offense'? Where's the 'threat'? This bewilders me.

I never got that either. I disagree with your stance in some ways, but some guys at FSM really think you should be beaten up over it!

The fun thing about an MB is that you talk to people with alternate opinions.

There's a point in which I think Thor isn't right. He calls album producing an artform. The piece of interest is the music itself. It wasn't made in a vacuum, right, like a lot of other music we're conveniently ignoring. But I'm still yet to hear a reasonable explanation of why an original work should be altered

Album production is not an art strictly speaking, but it is a very important craft in bringing the best out of an album.

[Jay 37,355]

To be honest neither Ricard or Jason have any right to tell you what to discuss as long as it does not go against Forum rules.

Yes all that matters is that there are no personal attacks. They have been on the rise this week for some reason!

[BloodBoal 7,538]

The Hobbit and 48fps is getting on the nerves of some members, it seems. It's all Jackson's fault.

[Thor 7,503]

Thor used to be adamant that his vision was the only correct one and condescendingly declared that people who liked C&C were only interested in recalling scenes from the movie and couldn't possibly appreciate the music on its own terms (even when it came to unused and alternate cues?).

But these days he's been saying that album is just his preference over C&C, which I think is fine. I often agree. It is also true that the album often does indeed represent the composer's wishes for listeners, whether you choose to follow them or not.

He also used to hate the business of the specialty labels and moan when a complete score was released, which seemed a little rude to the people who make their living at it. Again, though, no longer an issue.

Yeah, you're right in your observation. I've basically "given up". The industry is what it is, and the demand is what it is. No matter what I say and how vocal I am about it, nothing will change. I'm simply at odds with the 'niche' preference, and I have to accept that. Fortunately (for me), I've cut down soundtrack purchases anyway, and what I still buy is usually commercial releases, which are A&A 90% of the time (except in cases such as THE HOBBIT).

At least untill someone releases a hitherto unreleased Williams gem in a C&C format (with no previous album program alternative). Then it's back to hair-tearing again, because as a JW completist, I obviously need to have it.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Thor, how do you feel about the trend of including both the complete score and the album presentation?

In a way that is the perfect compromise.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

E.T. is great as a 40 minute album and the complete score, or even just individual tracks. It's all up to the listener's tastes.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Thor, how do you feel about the trend of including both the complete score and the album presentation?

In a way that is the perfect compromise.

Except for those with a small wallet.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Wasnt TESB a 2 LP job?

ROTJ was a dissapointment.

yes but even I wanted more music.

[Thor 7,503]

Thor, how do you feel about the trend of including both the complete score and the album presentation?

In a way that is the perfect compromise.

It is, absolutely. The downside is that you have to pay more for it, because it often needs to be spread out over multiple CD's. I assume that's annoying also for those who prefer the C&C, since they have no need for the A&A as a 'bonus'. So it goes both ways.

I like the suggestion Datameister gave above -- a regular album release, but with the option to download the extra music for those who crave that. Of course, it poses another problem, i.e. that the album is released physically, and the extra music digitally. It won't be in the same 'package'.

Difficult to find the optimal solution for both camps.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

Well, many of these examples we're talking perfect scores in either form. Jaws, E.T., the Star Wars trilogy, etc.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Ive cut down my soundtrack buying to the extent that I only get what I really want, and in that the a few extra Euro's for a second CD is fine.

[filmmusic 1,828]

I certainly prefer complete scores!!

Complete scores give you the power of choice!

You listen to the parts you lke, and you don't listen to the parts you don't like. Simple as that.

While, with standard album presentations, you stick with whatever is included there and no more!

(of course this goes for music that shows great musical ability. Not for scores that have 4 chords repeated for 70 minutes. You don't need a complete score there.)

[Wojo 2,453]

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

While, with standard album presentations, you stick with whatever is included there and no more!

And that is just AWFUL!

How can you continue to live while you are being deprived!

[filmmusic 1,828]

While, with standard album presentations, you stick with whatever is included there and no more!

And that is just AWFUL!

How can you continue to live while you are being deprived!

Exactly!

Imagine everyone, if we were stuck with the original 1982 album presentation of E.T.

We would have missed so many great moments!!

[Thor 7,503]

I certainly prefer complete scores!!

Complete scores give you the power of choice!

You listen to the parts you lke, and you don't listen to the parts you don't like. Simple as that.

While, with standard album presentations, you stick with whatever is included there and no more!

(of course this goes for music that shows great musical ability. Not for scores that have 4 chords repeated for 70 minutes. You don't need a complete score there.)

Well, I don't listen to soundtracks that way. I listen to them as concept albums, much like I do a classical symphony or an album like Pink Floyd's THE WALL. I press "Play" and let it play out from start to finish -- unless I'm being interupted by something. I don't just play the tracks I like in a sort of 'meal-piece' approach. That's why the programming is so important to me; a programming hopefully done by the composer him/herself -- his artistic re-conceptualization of the score.

[Quintus 5,399]

Thor, did you ever buy a single?

[Brónach 1,302]

Or

Thor, did you ever listen to radio?

Or

Thor, did you ever listen to something in youtube?

Or

Thor, were you ever to a party?

[Thor 7,503]

He, he...I said I usually don't listen to soundtracks in a mealpiece fashion. SOUNDTRACKS!

Heck, even the greatest film score compilations have a good 'concept feel', like Varese's 30th anniv. set. Each disc has its own atmosphere, its own build, its own mix between calm and upbeat etc. That's a great set.

[Wojo 2,453]

Many classic novels or other large works of fiction are commonly available in at least two formats: abridged and unabridged. If you want to read the whole thing, read the unabridged version. If you want to read a shortened sampling of the work that gets the point across without all the extra fluff and gets you done in time for tea, read the abridged version.

Sure, if one wants to listen to the musical score as presented in the film, they can and often watch the movie. But don't even mention that, really, because it's buried under dialogue and sound effects, dialed out, looped around, and you get distracted by the visuals. That argument is pointless. If you want to "watch" the movie without the sound effects and music, you can mute the TV. If you want just the audio portion, you can look away or dim your screen, or rip all of the audio track to an iPod and listen to that. But there is no easy way to separate the dialogue and effects from the music to gain just the music -- that's why the whole "soundtrack/score album industry" exists in the first place.

Heck, even the greatest film score compilations have a good 'concept feel', like Varese's 30th anniv. set. Each disc has its own atmosphere, its own build, its own mix between calm and upbeat etc. That's a great set.

Well, yes, a "film score compilation" is naturally going to have a "good 'concept' feel" because it's essentially a greatest hits collection. Most of the big film score composers have these types of albums, consisting of both live and studio performances -- Bernstein, Goldsmith, Barry, Williams, Rozsa, et al. So too do nearly all of the rock, country, rap, pop, and other popular vocal music categories have their own "greates hits" albums, and nobody is going to sit there and say whether those albums should only be arranged in chronological order or balanced for "listening experience" because it varies. Nobody is really going to argue that a rock star's "greatest hits" album should simply be their entire repertoire in album order by year of release, unless it's a band like The Cars whose first album was their best greatest hits album, or a lazy band like Boston that put out six albums in 30 years.

I'm going to miss Mark Olivarez. Again.

[Jilal 569]

I certainly prefer complete scores!!

Complete scores give you the power of choice!

You listen to the parts you lke, and you don't listen to the parts you don't like. Simple as that.

While, with standard album presentations, you stick with whatever is included there and no more!

(of course this goes for music that shows great musical ability. Not for scores that have 4 chords repeated for 70 minutes. You don't need a complete score there.)

Well, I don't listen to soundtracks that way. I listen to them as concept albums, much like I do a classical symphony or an album like Pink Floyd's THE WALL. I press "Play" and let it play out from start to finish -- unless I'm being interupted by something. I don't just play the tracks I like in a sort of 'meal-piece' approach. That's why the programming is so important to me; a programming hopefully done by the composer him/herself -- his artistic re-conceptualization of the score.

I must say I agree with you here - I don't 'just listen the tracks' as well. In my point of view, the (artistic) presentation of the music is indeed very important to keep a listener intrigued. Even the amount of silence between the tracks can contribute to that.

I really like complete releases because it gives you the freedom to hear the music you want to - but I prefer a proper album presentation to listen to.

[Brónach 1,302]

Many classic novels or other large works of fiction are commonly available in at least two formats: abridged and unabridged. If you want to read the whole thing, read the unabridged version. If you want to read a shortened sampling of the work that gets the point across without all the extra fluff and gets you done in time for tea, read the abridged version.

And that is great. That said, the average two hour score from your collection isn't the Mahábharata.

[Thor 7,503]

Well, yes, a "film score compilation" is naturally going to have a "good 'concept' feel" because it's essentially a greatest hits collection. Most of the big film score composers have these types of albums, consisting of both live and studio performances -- Bernstein, Goldsmith, Barry, Williams, Rozsa, et al. So too do nearly all of the rock, country, rap, pop, and other popular vocal music categories have their own "greates hits" albums, and nobody is going to sit there and say whether those albums should only be arranged in chronological order or balanced for "listening experience" because it varies. Nobody is really going to argue that a rock star's "greatest hits" album should simply be their entire repertoire in album order by year of release, unless it's a band like The Cars whose first album was their best greatest hits album, or a lazy band like Boston that put out six albums in 30 years.

Not sure why you brought in rock/pop compilations, which is a very different thing.

Some film music compilations are just "greatest hits", true. But the best of them have an internal logic, a musical structure and so on even though the tracks are from different films. Silva Screen has become particularly good at creating compilation programs like this, as has Varese.

[OneBuckFilms 319]

My only issue with Thor is not his preference, but his "militancy", if you will on the issue.

(I know, Thor, I'm talking about you in the third-person. No disrespect, just speaking to the public in general )

He does indeed have a point when it comes to the presentation of film scores, and many, IMHO don't hold up with a C & C presentation.

However, many of them actually do, by my estimation.

Star Wars, Star Trek: TMP, Independence Day, for example.

Actually, most of the Star Trek scores do for me.

Fundamentally, however, as Thor does point out often, it is really an idealistic preference as to which way is best.

This is an age-old conversation that gets rather heated, which is to be expected when we are all so passionate about these scores.

I prefer complete for a lot of scores, but if it doesn't hold up that way, a great OST presentation is probably the best way to present the score.

Thor also looks at a soundtrack as a Concept Album of sorts, completely divorced from it's original musical context, which is an interesting idea, but not really what most of us want.

[Wojo 2,453]

Uh, yeah, you're right. Time to sell back all my C&C albums and only listen to au-Thor-ized OST presentations.