The Official "Album Presentation vs Complete & Chronological Presentation" Thread Round 2

[Thor 7,453]

Admin Note 1: The first page and a half of this thread originally appeared in this thread: https://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/32982-amistad-chance-of-remastered-expanded-and-definitive-release/

 

Admin Note 2: If you want an example of how this is a cyclical conversation that never ends, see this thread from 10 years ago: https://www.jwfan.com/forums/index.php?/topic/19348-the-official-album-presentation-vs-complete-chronological-presentation-thread/

 

I take issue with the word 'definitive' in the headline. To me, the OST will always and forever be the 'definitive' release - both in sound and presentation. But by all means -- I have what I need; if others need this, be my guest.

[Bayesian 1,355]

5 hours ago, Thor said:

I take issue with the word 'definitive' in the headline. To me, the OST will always and forever be the 'definitive' release - both in sound and presentation. But by all means -- I have what I need; if others need this, be my guest.

I know this has been discussed in other threads, but as a refresher: if an OST was missing a memorable cue (a lovely rendition of an existing theme, or a theme entirely missing on the OST), how would you be able to consider the OST definitive? Wouldn’t you have any regrets about the music that was missing?

[Disco Stu 15,495]

16 minutes ago, Bayesian said:

I know this has been discussed in other threads

 

Understatement. Of. The. Millennium.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

39 minutes ago, Bayesian said:

I know this has been discussed in other threads, but as a refresher: if an OST was missing a memorable cue (a lovely rendition of an existing theme, or a theme entirely missing on the OST), how would you be able to consider the OST definitive? Wouldn’t you have any regrets about the music that was missing?

 

Thor doesn't care about the individual tracks. It's the journey that matters for him, and bad sound quality doesn't exist.

[Holko 9,491]

Thor only cares about releases that are not the score as is, as envisioned, he wants something else built from it. Well, he has that with many OSTs, but because of that, those cannot be the definitive release of the score because they aren't the score but something else built from it.

[Thor 7,453]

2 hours ago, Bayesian said:

I know this has been discussed in other threads, but as a refresher: if an OST was missing a memorable cue (a lovely rendition of an existing theme, or a theme entirely missing on the OST), how would you be able to consider the OST definitive? Wouldn’t you have any regrets about the music that was missing?

 

As others have pointed out, I don't care what's missing and I generally don't give a rat's ass about the film when I'm listening to a soundtrack. And I don't evaluate a soundtrack by its quantity of music. The definitive presentation of a score is when a composer has reconceptualized their music with listening in mind. So I just wanted to get that in there - since JohnnyD's and my definition of what 'definitive' means, differs radically.

[bruce marshall 1,314]

 Wow! I never thought Thor would approve of an expansion!

 

 

Oh, wait......he didn't?😞

[Bespin 8,472]

Please never speak of a "Definitve release" on JWfan.com, that's against rule #372.

[Richard Penna 3,666]

1 hour ago, Thor said:

And I don't evaluate a soundtrack by its quantity of music.

 

You absolutely do. And there have been plenty of examples of your complaining about a release being too long, when it's pretty clear you just don't like the score, and good old 'how dare composer X not reconceptualise this for me!' gets the blame.

[Jay 37,267]

[bruce marshall 1,314]

4 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

 

Understatement. Of. The. Millennium.

Now you undersand why my Norweigan brother  was number two " ignored" on FSM Message board.

Now that I've ' 'abdicated' my throne, I wonder if he ascended to the top?

😆😅😅😅😅😅😅😆😊😊😊😊😊😊

[Thor 7,453]

1 hour ago, Richard Penna said:

You absolutely do.

 

Wrong. Length is really irrelevant, and I've said this many, many times. What matters is how it works as a listening experience, and that there has been put proper care into rearranging it for that purpose. Some times, it works at 30 minutes, other times at 70. But I would say that, as a general rule, most singular works work best between 30-50 minutes somewhere, unless you're talking massively ambitious works like STAR WARS or Wagner etc. It's in that territory you'll find a lot of symphonies, concept albums and the like - soundtrack albums' siblings. But again, it depends on the type of score.

 

This is completely different from a vast majority of you who seem to judge a soundtrack album's quality by how MUCH music there is - a notion I've always found bizarre, to put it mildly. It's like judging a film by how long it is or a book by how thick it is.

[bruce marshall 1,314]

I agree with Thor [ ducks]

[JohnnyD 1,220]

Uh, you know when I say "definitive," I mean "complete," as in the entire score. Sometimes, and now very rarely, expanded does not necessarily mean complete (*cough* Hook 2012 Two-CD set *cough*).

[Thor 7,453]

4 minutes ago, JohnnyD said:

Uh, you know when I say "definitive," I mean "complete," as in the entire score. Sometimes, and now very rarely, expanded does not necessarily mean complete (*cough* Hook 2012 Two-CD set *cough*).

 

Well, if that is what you meant, that is absolutely fine. That's a factual thing. 'Definitive', however, is a more loaded word - as in the 'pinnacle', the 'authoritative' etc. - and that's what I reacted to, because that is surely in the eye of the beholder. One man's definitive is another man's bottom of the barrel!

[Richard Penna 3,666]

39 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

Some times, it works at 30 minutes, other times at 70

 

This is the primary issue with your argument - some 60 minute albums drag, while others whiz by (I manage to play Enola Holmes nearly twice in a row without really realising it). You're taking an album that you think drags a bit in full CD form, and playing 'victim' that the composer has failed to reconceptualise it, when all that's happened is that they think their score is interesting, and has arranged it nicely into a 70 minute program, and you don't find it as interesting as they do.

[Bespin 8,472]

I currrently discover that Jerry Goldsmith was a Master in doing great album programs.

 

Personally, I love to have the choice of sometimes listening to a complete score and sometimes listen to the composer LP program.

 

For me, they represent two very different work of art, and we have to discover the two.

[Richard Penna 3,666]

I have the OST and complete score for quite a lot of scores. The Haunting is one of those, actually.

[Marian Schedenig 8,158]

4 minutes ago, Bespin said:

I currrently discover that Jerry Goldsmith was a Master in doing great album programs.

 

Sometimes. Sometimes not. Sometimes major themes and set pieces are missing on the OST (c.f. First Knight). And not all of Goldsmith's 30 minute Varese releases were as long as he would have liked them to be.

[Bespin 8,472]

Don't start me on this, because I'll talk again about the Return of the Jedi very conservative and actioncue-oriented LP deceptive program...

[Romão 2,274]

1 hour ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

Sometimes. Sometimes not. Sometimes major themes and set pieces are missing on the OST (c.f. First Knight). And not all of Goldsmith's 30 minute Varese releases were as long as he would have liked them to be.

 

Yeah, it's really hard to generalize with Goldsmith. Some scores I only truly started loving them in their expanded form (The Shadow, First Knight, The Final Frontier), while others work wonderfully well in shorter, 30 minutes albums (like Masada, although it's an album re-recording). 

[bruce marshall 1,314]

4 hours ago, Marian Schedenig said:

 

Sometimes. Sometimes not. Sometimes major themes and set pieces are missing on the OST (c.f. First Knight). And not all of Goldsmith's 30 minute Varese releases were as long as he would have liked them to be.

FIRST KNIGHT inexicably left off the LANCELOT Theme, despite there being room for it.

Composers don't always get it right!

Generally, his albums are better than c & c: CAP ONE, OUTLAND, TZONE....

4 hours ago, Bespin said:

Don't start me on this, because I'll talk again about the Return of the Jedi very conservative and actioncue-oriented LP deceptive program...

YEAH . WHY are we arguing this again?

We have a separate thread for a general discussion .

Stick to AMISTAD😵

[crumbs 14,287]

Well I guess @JohnnyD got his debate after all.

[bruce marshall 1,314]

7 hours ago, Bespin said:

Please never speak of a "Definitve release" on JWfan.com, that's against rule #372.

Rule # 1.

Any member who complains that a release is " expanded, NOT complete" shall be sentenced to reading nothing but Thor's posts for all eternity.

[Holko 9,491]

6 hours ago, Thor said:

What matters is how it works as a listening experience, and that there has been put proper care into rearranging it for that purpose. Some times, it works at 30 minutes, other times at 70.

And many many many times it just works perfectly well as is if you have an attention span, no rearranging necessary.

[Brundlefly 2,385]

7 hours ago, Thor said:

Well, if that is what you meant, that is absolutely fine. That's a factual thing. 'Definitive', however, is a more loaded word - as in the 'pinnacle', the 'authoritative' etc. - and that's what I reacted to, because that is surely in the eye of the beholder. One man's definitive is another man's bottom of the barrel!

Meanwhile the term "definitive" has been standardized, at least on this kind of forum, and clearly defines a release that offers you every bit of music there is from a certain score, including the complete score, source music, alternates, concert suites, and maybe even the OST program.

 

So why even arguing about it again and again?

[Thor 7,453]

8 hours ago, Richard Penna said:

This is the primary issue with your argument - some 60 minute albums drag, while others whiz by (I manage to play Enola Holmes nearly twice in a row without really realising it). You're taking an album that you think drags a bit in full CD form, and playing 'victim' that the composer has failed to reconceptualise it, when all that's happened is that they think their score is interesting, and has arranged it nicely into a 70 minute program, and you don't find it as interesting as they do.

 

Maybe it's the syntax of your writing, but I can neither understand this properly, nor recognize myself in anything you describe.

 

If a score is bad in the first place, surely the experience is made extra bad if it's dragged out in time as well.

[Holko 9,491]

Or it's not bad, just not for you. Or it's presented in a way that doesn't emphasise its strengths as opposed to its complete form.

[Thor 7,453]

1 hour ago, Brundlefly said:

Meanwhile the term "definitive" has been standardized, at least on this kind of forum, and clearly defines a release that offers you every bit of music there is from a certain score, including the complete score, source music, alternates, concert suites, and maybe even the OST program.

 

I don't know about any 'standardized' interpretation of the word in this forum, I'm afraid. I'm just going by the official definition of the word. If the headline had read 'remastered, expanded and complete', I would have had no issue with it. It's the use of the more subjective word 'definitive' which irked me. Of course, JohnnyD has since explained that it was 'complete' he meant, so all's good. We're just treading water now.

 

4 minutes ago, Holko said:

Or it's not bad, just not for you. Or it's presented in a way that doesn't emphasise its strengths as opposed to its complete form.

 

Sure, an A&A - as I call it - can be either good or bad. An album isn't necessarily bullet proof just because it's been rearranged for listening. But the act of rearrangement has to have taken place in order for me to consider it a proper soundtrack album. I consider C&C releases 'archival/archeological entities', and they will never be definitive soundtrack album presentations.

[Holko 9,491]

OK, let's see the first 3 definitions in Merriam-Webster.

 

 

Quote

 

1 : serving to provide a final solution or to end a situation

      //a definitive victory

      //could not give a definitive diagnosis

2 : authoritative and apparently exhaustive

      //a definitive critical biography

3a : serving to define or specify precisely

      //established definitive guidelines for sentencing criminals

  b : serving as a perfect example : quintessential

     //a definitive bourgeois

     //A slow race is the definitive Leechfield competition. You win it by coming in last.— Mary Karr

 

 

I wouldn't apply any of that to a presentation cut in half constrained by a physical disc runtime and robbing the score of its intended written thematic structures, but it definitely applies to complete presentations that finally actually provide the whole thing as is. Seems to me it's you who's subjectivising language to fit your own way of looking at these.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

I'd say the definitive presentations are those that contain both the expanded score and the OST in one package.

[Thor 7,453]

2 minutes ago, Holko said:

I wouldn't apply any of that to a presentation cut in half and robbing the score of its intended written thematic structures, but it definitely applies to complete presentations that finally actually provide the whole thing as is. Seems to me it's you who's subjectivising language to fit your own way of looking at these.

 

You just used a very subjective reading of that definition, with words sucuh as 'cut in half and robbing...". Meanwhile, I can do the same from my end. I could easily use the same definition to denigrate C&C releases by saying 'a presentation that ignores the aspect of adaptation, and robs the score of its standalone musical quality' etc. From my perspective, there is no definitive or authoritative aspect of treating a score this way.

 

So you just proved my point -- calling something 'definitive' is in the eye of the beholder.

[Holko 9,491]

Sorry, you're right, saying a 40-70 minute presentation of an 80 or 120 minute score is cut in half is totally subjective. Or that a collection of setpieces and moments yanked out of context is taking away the originally intended structure.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

2 minutes ago, Holko said:

Sorry, you're right, saying a 40-70 minute presentation of an 80 or 120 minute score is cut in half is totally subjective.

 

Indeed, 120 minutes cut in half is merely 60 minutes. 

[Thor 7,453]

5 minutes ago, Holko said:

Sorry, you're right, saying a 40-70 minute presentation of an 80 or 120 minute score is cut in half is totally subjective. Or that a collection of setpieces and moments yanked out of context is taking away the originally intended structure.

 

It was mostly 'robbing' I was referring to. Same thing you just did in this post, by saying 'yank out of context' where I would instead say 'properly re-arrange into what makes musical sense, not filmical, and what gives best musical flow'. And 'taking away the intended structure', as you say, is usually a necessity, since there are now new intentions to consider. Just as you would when adapting a book to film.

 

So we can go back and forth all day. You will never convince me that a C&C release is the most definitive, just as I cannot convince you that an A&A (arranged & abbreviated) is. And round and round we go.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

[Holko 9,491]

Especially when you again keep saying stuff like "what gives the best musical flow". 98% or scores where I tried both versions or at least looked at the OST tracklist flowed and worked a ton better in complete form for me.

[Thor 7,453]

1 minute ago, Holko said:

Especially when you again keep saying stuff like "what gives the best musical flow". 98% or scores where I tried both versions or at least looked at the OST tracklist flowed and worked a ton better in complete form for me.

 

That's fine. If that's your experience, you're free to have it. I have friends who like sardines on their pizza. I can never understand it, but they're free to have that taste.

[Holko 9,491]

But I don't subjectively misuse language for it that makes it sound like I am the center of the universe and what I feel is dogmatically true. Or at least I try not to

[Thor 7,453]

Just now, Holko said:

But I don't use language for it that makes it sound like I am the center of the universe and what I feel is dogmatically true.

 

Nor do I.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

5 minutes ago, Thor said:

I have friends who like sardines on their pizza

 

Pineapple's the thing!

 

4 minutes ago, Holko said:

But I don't use language for it that makes it sound like I am the center of the universe and what I feel is dogmatically true.

 

4 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

Nor do I.

 

I'd say you're both uncompromising in your arguments. At least most of the time.

[Holko 9,491]

2 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

Nor do I.

The only reason you even entered the thread was to start another pisswar about someone not using a term like you would about a topic you have no interest in.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

.

[bruce marshall 1,314]

I agree with Thor.

😎

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

8 hours ago, Richard Penna said:

I manage to play Enola Holmes nearly twice in a row without really realising it

 

If you really listen to it, playing it once is more than sufficient.

[Thor 7,453]

 

16 minutes ago, Holko said:

The only reason you even entered the thread was to start another pisswar about someone not using a term like you would about a topic you have no interest in.

 

Not at all. I was provoked by the word 'definitive' in the headline (before JohnnyD specified what he meant) -- as if it's some established truth that everyone thinks C&C releases are that. I wanted to point out that no, not everyone thinks so. It was important for me to make that comment, so I made it. I very much had interest in this.

 

I'm not sure why you're displaying such aggressive behaviour, using criticisms like 'center of the universe' and 'dogmatic truths'. I've never said anything that is even remotely in that territory. I have a preference, like you, and I have a rationale behind it, i.e. why I have the preference that I do. Again just like you. So we're just exchanging rationales, really. You more aggressively and personally than me, for some reason, but that's about it.

[bruce marshall 1,314]

8 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

 

Not at all. I was provoked by the word 'definitive' in the headline (before JohnnyD specified what he meant) -- as if it's some established truth that everyone thinks C&C releases are that. I wanted to point out that no, not everyone thinks so.

 

 

Well, everyone does think that - except for Thor and

I😞

57 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

 

Indeed, 120 minutes cut in half is merely 60 minutes. 

Except in Australia.

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

30 minutes ago, bruce marshall said:

Except in Australia.

 

I don't think Holko is Australian.

[bruce marshall 1,314]

Just now, Jurassic Shark said:

 

I don't think Holko is Australian.

Irrelevant.

Remember that STAR TREK episode where two entities were trapped for all eternity in a life or death struggle?

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,008]

I don't watch B-shows.