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

[Richard Penna 3,667]

2 hours ago, Thor said:

 

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.

 

You've kind of understood my point - if you don't like the score, the album will drag, and I think you're then blaming the composer for not reconceptualising it enough for you. If the score were really interesting and stood up to a long album, then in your mind the 'reconceptualising' has been successful, but actually all that's happened is you find the score interesting.

 

Hence, if the score is good, it's easy to make a longer album that plays well. Next time you decide a composer hasn't made a proper listening experience, ask yourself whether it's simply that you don't like the score.

[Thor 7,457]

1 hour ago, Richard Penna said:

 

You've kind of understood my point - if you don't like the score, the album will drag, and I think you're then blaming the composer for not reconceptualising it enough for you. If the score were really interesting and stood up to a long album, then in your mind the 'reconceptualising' has been successful, but actually all that's happened is you find the score interesting.

 

Hence, if the score is good, it's easy to make a longer album that plays well. Next time you decide a composer hasn't made a proper listening experience, ask yourself whether it's simply that you don't like the score.

 

It's a very difficult thought experiment you have going here. I'm trying to wrap my head around it, I really am. But not sure I can.

 

I think every single score should be reconceptualized for album, meaning that the composer-producer should select the best parts of the score, and put them in an order that makes musically sense, not filmically. It should represent the score well, but not merely present it as is. Moving music from film to album is like any other adaptation process, and an artform in itself.

 

Evaluating the success of a soundtrack album is a combination of the music itself, and the way it is structured. If no re-arrangement has taken place, i.e. if it's C&C, it's disqualified as a "proper" soundtrack album in my book (I repeat: in my book). It's something else; an archeological artifact. If re-arrangement has taken place, it qualifies as a proper soundtrack album. Then I might evaluate whether that re-arrangement/listening experience works or not. Just because re-arrangement has taken place, doesn't automatically mean I will love it. Again, that depends on the type of music and other factors.

 

I'm not even sure I answered your query, but again - I have trouble understanding it.

 

If a score is bad, I don't it 'blame it' on the lack of a proper reconceptulization. I blame it on the score itself. But a bad presentation may make it worse.

[Jurassic Shark 12,012]

When I listen to operas, I prefer listening the whole opera instead of an album of highlights or suites. This is sometimes the case for film scores as well, such as the perfect score to The Empire Strikes Back.

[Thor 7,457]

6 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

When I listen to operas, I prefer listening the whole opera instead of an album of highlights or suites. 

 

So do I. But if that opera had been adapted to a different medium, I expect some changes to be made to accomodate the medium it's being transferred to.

[Richard Penna 3,667]

34 minutes ago, Thor said:

I'm not even sure I answered your query, but again - I have trouble understanding it.

 

No problem - I'm trying to pick you up on one particular issue.

 

Essentially, your past postings have suggested that you find longer albums in general, work less well as a listening experience - and to some extent, I agree.

 

But I think you're often too quick to decide that the reason these long albums don't work is because the composer neglected the 'listening experience', whereas it can in fact simply be because the score's not as good, or the composer's selection isn't to your taste.

 

McCreary's two Outlander season 1 albums are a perfect example - every album he released for this show was oriented towards listening. The second album, which you expressed disappointment at it existing - I agree that it plays worse than the first, but I think it's because a handful of tracks he chose aren't that interesting. It's categorically not because he didn't arrange it for listening. He just thought some material worked that we don't.

 

Are you with me now?  Essentially: an unengaging album doesn't mean a lack of arrangement, and you need to think about what else might have gone 'wrong' in its conception before you just say the composer didn't make a 'proper' album.

[Thor 7,457]

OK, I think I'm starting to get you.

 

And I agree, sort of. If a soundtrack album doesn't grab me, it doesn't only have to be because the re-arrangement isn't good enough. It could also very well be the nature of the score itself. I touched on this in my previous post. Ultimately, what matters the most to me is that the composer actually has made efforts to re-arrange it for listening. If I still don't like it after that, well - as you say, it could very well be because the score wasn't very good to begin with.

[Holko 9,491]

So... operas are fine when listened to on their own without being in the theatre with sets and witnessing the singing live... but film scores have to be rearranged for listening and can't work otherwise as they are, as a  piece of musical narrative storytelling, because... um... because you've set up this impenetrable mental block for yourself and that's just how it is?

[Jay 37,271]

1 minute ago, Holko said:

because you've set up this impenetrable mental block for yourself and that's just how it is?

This guy gets it

[Richard Penna 3,667]

4 minutes ago, Thor said:

Ultimately, what matters the most to me is that the composer actually has made efforts to re-arrange it for listening.

 

Absolutely, and you've still got a sliding scale of 'how much is enough' re-arranging, but you've got my point.

 

I tend to be on the other side to you, as I love watching a film and being able to immediately identify the music playing. Hence, more and more for expanded releases, I often keep the composer's original album (particularly if it was at the more extreme end of re-arranging) and the full score, so I can have the best of both worlds.

[Jurassic Shark 12,012]

25 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

So do I. But if that opera had been adapted to a different medium, I expect some changes to be made to accomodate the medium it's being transferred to.

 

When listening to an album, it is a different medium than intended.

[GerateWohl 4,322]

25 minutes ago, Holko said:

So... operas are fine when listened to on their own without being in the theatre with sets and witnessing the singing live... but film scores have to be rearranged for listening and can't work otherwise as they are, as a  piece of musical narrative storytelling, because... um... because you've set up this impenetrable mental block for yourself and that's just how it is?

There might be scores that are done like operas. For example I understood that Rian Johnson let Williams record the music for The Last Jedi in advance so that he could edit the film along the music. But in general, especially due to last minute changes film soundtrack is often cut to pieces to accompany the film. Opera is different. The whole show fallows the music. The acting is around the music. So, yes, in such cases listening to operas or soundtracks on CD is quite different. Especially, when you listen to these bootlegs where suddenly the music becomes very quiet because somebody is saying something in the movie.

But it depends on the case. In some cases I prefer the original album, sometimes the complete score.

But of course I want to have the choice.

[Holko 9,491]

17 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

But in general, especially due to last minute changes film soundtrack is often cut to pieces to accompany the film.

Which are not present if you're listening to the actual recorded cues and the score magically still works on its own.

 

18 minutes ago, GerateWohl said:

Especially, when you listen to these bootlegs where suddenly the music becomes very quiet because somebody is saying something in the movie.

except when you're listening to proper releases of the actual cues, not surround rips or leaked assembled mixed film stems.

[mstrox 6,637]

5 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

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

Came in here to say the same thing.

[Jurassic Shark 12,012]

Just now, mstrox said:

Came in here to say the same thing.

 

I did the dirty work for you. 

 

Btw, why isn't there a waffle smiley at JWFan? A scandal!

[Thor 7,457]

1 hour ago, Holko said:

So... operas are fine when listened to on their own without being in the theatre with sets and witnessing the singing live... but film scores have to be rearranged for listening and can't work otherwise as they are, as a  piece of musical narrative storytelling, because... um... because you've set up this impenetrable mental block for yourself and that's just how it is?

 

Geratewohl basically said what I wanted to say, but again:

 

Opera and even ballets are (almost always) written to be 'absolute music' from the get-go, so the difference between listening to it on CD or in the opera house isn't that dramatic, structurally. Film music, on the other hand, is written after the fact, to accompany specific images and timings. This makes all the difference in the world. Film music was never intended to be listened to alone. But it can, and it works wonderfully once changes have been made to adapt it to a medium usually attributed to absolute music.

[Holko 9,491]

...or if no changes are made to it because the composer can write music fit to specific images and timing while still making it a great musical journey as is.

[Thor 7,457]

Just now, Holko said:

...or if no changes are made to it because the composer can write music fit to specific images and timing while still making it a great musical journey as is.

 

Well, there we depart.

[Jurassic Shark 12,012]

C'mon, I'm sure you enjoy the complete TESB.

[GerateWohl 4,322]

In the end, ballet, opera, film score, it is all program music. And the restrictions of an edited film with soundeffects and so on can be very fruitful for the composition of the music. I used very often to first listen to the score and then watching the film years after. And often then I saw that some turns or changes in the music were actually caused by cuts in the scene or between two scenes. And that is something that CAN be enriching.

 

But there are, especially  nowadays scores where composers (probably also caused by the demand of directors) just lay some sound-alike orchestra sound carpet on the scene which reminds you of music and you are anyway to busy following the noises and fast edited pictures that you don't realize there is no melody, no theme, just a d major chord in strings with some sound effects. Oh, next scene in Africa. Let's put some etnic drums on top of it. Next scene in egypt. Put an oriental flute with some random arabic melody on top. Oh, something sad happens. Change the chord to minor. And so on. And it works. But that is probably a different discussion.

 

[Romão 2,274]

I didn't really want to chime in, but this is debate has been going on long enough.

 

You know, Thor, I would take your stance much more seriously if you, albeit having a general preference for shorter, album oriented and composer supervised soundtrack presentations, would every now and then concede that some scores do indeed work much better and their musical architecture and thought becomes much more apparent in their complete form.

 

By copy pasting the same post for the last 10 years or so (probably even more) on every thread for a new JW expanded edition, you come across as someone who found a identitary niche, a personality gimmick, to which you cling to no matter what, as it were a crucial and irreplaceable element of your self image.

 

I mean no disrespect, as I generally enjoying reading your opinions on soundtracks and movies, and your less orthodox opinions are often refreshing. But your stance on expanded editions is starting to veer dangerously close to blind fundamentalism, just for the sake of it.

[crumbs 14,287]

Also, I can't really be bothered joining the discussion around Thor and OSTs, except to say the cue above is the culmination of every character theme in the score. It accompanies the narrative climax of the film, where freedom is finally won after so much angst and suffering .... and JW saw fit to leave it off the soundtrack and repeat the opening track instead.

 

It's akin to leaving T-Rex Rescue and Finale off the OST for Jurassic Park, or The Spark off The Last Jedi, or The Presses Roll off The Post, etc.

[Thor 7,457]

31 minutes ago, Romão said:

You know, Thor, I would take your stance much more seriously if you, albeit having a general preference for shorter, album oriented and composer supervised soundtrack presentations, would every now and then concede that some scores do indeed work much better and their musical architecture and thought becomes much more apparent in their complete form.

 

I don't see why I would need to? It's like saying to someone "I wish you sometimes would concede that sardines on pizza taste great!". If you don't like it, you don't like it.

 

That being said, I have mentioned some scores over the years that work reasonably well in expanded format. The Arista box STAR WARSes, for example. ROCKY IV. A fairly recent soundtrack release of the Norwegian film PINCHCLIFFE GRAND PRIX.

 

There's probably somewhere between 1-5% of scores that work reasonably well in expanded or even complete format, so it's not altogether black/white.

 

Quote

I mean no disrespect, as I generally enjoying reading your opinions on soundtracks and movies, and your less orthodox opinions are often refreshing. But your stance on expanded editions is starting to veer dangerously close to blind fundamentalism, just for the sake of it.

 

It's just a preference. No more, no less. And I have a rationale as to why I have that particular preference, as I think all people should have.

Vice versa, I have a deep wish that people didn't make such a big deal out of it. That I can post a comment like "I take issue with the use of the word 'definitive'" without there being a long discussion about C&C vs. A&A. That would be refreshing! Just let me have my word and move on. But for some reason reason people take it personally - like you just did, opting for some bizarre psycho-analysis rather than focussing on the issue.

 

Because the fact is: I hate expanded releases. I don't hate people who listen to them and enjoy them. I wish more people would take that to heart.

[mstrox 6,637]

I love when the film score and the OST album are released together.

 

I also like Elfman's recent deal where he'll program an OST album and then include bonus tracks at the end - it's an acknowledgement that people want more than what he prefers.  Of course, I'm sure those releases are still not complete (and certainly not chronological).

 

Thor, as an Elfman fan, what are your thoughts on that?  Do you stop before you get to the bonus tracks?

[Thor 7,457]

13 minutes ago, mstrox said:

Thor, as an Elfman fan, what are your thoughts on that?  Do you stop before you get to the bonus tracks?

 

I don't really have any Elfman expansions (with bonus tracks). But yes, I probably would have.

[Jay 37,271]

16 minutes ago, mstrox said:

I also like Elfman's recent deal where he'll program an OST album and then include bonus tracks at the end

 

Elfman only did that on the OST albums of Dark Shadows, Frankenweenie, Goosebumps, Alice Through The Looking Glass, The Circle, and Justice League before abandoning the idea right?

[Richard Penna 3,667]

44 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

Because the fact is: I hate expanded releases. I don't hate people who listen to them and enjoy them. I wish more people would take that to heart.

 

I seem to remember you commented some while back that you don't only hate expanded releases, but also wish they actually didn't exist, as in, we were denied the ability to hear the extra music. Is that still your stance? Please correct me if I'm misremembering.

[1977 1,743]

Have to ask, how do we feel about film score compilations? What makes them definitive (or not)?

[mstrox 6,637]

16 minutes ago, Thor said:

 

I don't really have any Elfman expansions (with bonus tracks). But yes, I probably would have.

 

It's his OSTs!  See Jay's list above.  I know for a fact you have The Circle! (because you and I share it as one of the best albums of its year)

 

16 minutes ago, Jay said:

 

Elfman only did that on the OST albums of Dark Shadows, Frankenweenie, Goosebumps, Alice Through The Looking Glass, The Circle, and Justice League before abandoning the idea right?

 

I'm not sure whether he's abandoned the idea completely or not.  It seemed like he did quite a few, and we're not so far removed from 2019's Dumbo.  Seems like maybe he got the jones when he was doing that for the Elfman/Burton box and decided to throw extra stuff on releases going forward. But you're right, he hasn't done that on some newer releases.  Just listened to Doolittle for the first (and second) time yesterday - it was fine.  It almost seemed like the last tracks were "bonus tracks" even if they weren't labeled as such - the last track is just a weird bagpipe thing.

 

For my money, some of the best moments of his Dumbo score were in the "soaring" bonus tracks.

[publicist 4,643]

13 hours ago, Romão said:

 

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). 

 

Goldsmith albums from 1979 - 1983 (Under Fire) were pure bliss. Later they became more hit or miss, especially because Goldsmith did what Thor so loves, namely making a *rounded* presentation with all parts represented even if the score was boring and only good for the action cues.

[Thor 7,457]

59 minutes ago, Richard Penna said:

 

I seem to remember you commented some while back that you don't only hate expanded releases, but also wish they actually didn't exist, as in, we were denied the ability to hear the extra music. Is that still your stance? Please correct me if I'm misremembering.

 

No, you're right. I've said that a few times -- mostly tongue-in-cheek and more of a nostalgic cry for the late 90s and early 2000s, when there weren't so many of them, and discussions weren't constantly overtaken by talk about missing music or endless call-outs for expanded releases.

 

56 minutes ago, mstrox said:

It's his OSTs!  See Jay's list above.  I know for a fact you have The Circle! (because you and I share it as one of the best albums of its year)

 

Ah! I've never even thought of them as bonus tracks, but rather part of the album proper.

[Jay 37,271]

Use your eyeballs, Thor!

 

[Thor 7,457]

I very rarely look at track titles. Incidentally, I only own THE CIRCLE in digital format, so I don't think I've ever seen that backside (that's what she said!).

[mstrox 6,637]

Yeah, I think it came out digitally only before the eventual CD release, so I bought it digitally first.  Same with The Grinch, although on that one I still haven't picked up a CD version.

[publicist 4,643]

He's still right.

 

I don't care much for a composer-selected album, i care for a great 45-60 minute album. One thing I learned in recent years is that even the dreaded Varése 30-minuter often had the right amount of music, just not that well selected. Meaning *my* selection, of course...

[Richard Penna 3,667]

If you have zero connection to the film, Varese's 30-minuters can actually be just right.

 

But as soon as you see the film and notice the music, the acceptability ends there.

[publicist 4,643]

Yeah, the ancient struggle between guys who like music and guys who like movies.

[Thor 7,457]

I like both soundtrack listening and film watching, but one doesn't really have anything to do with the other (for me). I listen to soundtrack albums as if they're conceptual albums, akin to Pink Floyd's THE WALL or Grieg's PEER GYNT. I like to analyze and talk about film music in the film too, but then that's exclusively part of my film interest, alongside all the other tools.

[Jurassic Shark 12,012]

1 minute ago, Thor said:

Grieg's PEER GYNT

 

Great film!

[Richard Penna 3,667]

I find it surprising how those two interests merge so little that you don't find a desire to hear unreleased music more.

[Jurassic Shark 12,012]

You can hear it in the movie. 

[publicist 4,643]

It's actually a good point. I get all the frustration at albums like First Knight or Williams cutting out vital parts of a lost World action cue, but most of the time it's not that important to have humongous amounts of music (from one single movie) that supports movie scenes.

[Thor 7,457]

2 minutes ago, Richard Penna said:

I find it surprising how those two interests merge so little that you don't find a desire to hear unreleased music more.

 

Yes, I know that seems odd to many people, but there you go. My initial interest in soundtrack albums came out of listening to progressive rock and electronic music, and after noticing bits and pieces of great music in film and TV, I started to wonder if soundtrack albums had a similar 'conceptual' quality. And lo and behold - they did! As such, the film is never, ever the frame-of-reference for me in terms of soundtrack enjoyment. There could be a piece missing that is as great as Beethoven's 9th, and I really wouldn't care. All I ever cared about is what I 'have in front of me', so to speak, and how that holds up on its own.

[Brundlefly 2,385]

10 hours ago, Holko said:

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

 

 

 

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.

Those definitions make perfect sense regarding releases leaving nothing to desire. The majority of the forum is using the term correctly.

[Thor 7,457]

2 minutes ago, Brundlefly said:

Those definitions make perfect sense regarding releases leaving nothing to desire. The majority of the forum is using the term correctly.

 

They are using it a 'certain way', sure. But I obviously disagree with 'correctly.' Let's not walk down that path where one preference is more "correct" than the other.

[Brundlefly 2,385]

11 minutes ago, Thor said:

They are using it a 'certain way', sure. But I obviously disagree with 'correctly.' Let's not walk down that path where one preference is more "correct" than the other.

It's not about absolute truth, but we all use that term regularily and understand what we're referring to, still you seem to enjoy bringing up how much you disagree on that certain way we use it, although it's by definition applicable and comprehensible within this forum.

 

I would really like you to relinquish repeating your views on expansions in the future. That would be really nice, because in the end you don't add anything to the conversation, except that you don't like expansions, which is something that everybody knows for sure by now and will never ever forget.

[Romão 2,274]

4 hours ago, Thor said:

 

I don't see why I would need to? It's like saying to someone "I wish you sometimes would concede that sardines on pizza taste great!". If you don't like it, you don't like it.

 

 

That's not so much the issue, it's more like you refuse to try anything on a pizza that has the same color or shape of a sardine, regardless of the flavor

 

4 hours ago, Thor said:

 

But for some reason reason people take it personally - like you just did, opting for some bizarre psycho-analysis rather than focussing on the issue.

 

I apologize for that, I should not have made any personal judgments.

 

The thing that gets me, though, it's your almost absolute dismissal of expanded editions on principle, disregarding a whole plethora of nuance. You are potentially depriving yourself of musical enjoyment and discovery.

 

Mind you, I agree with you that often shorter albums do serve some scores better. That some composers know, better than most, how to properly assemble an album to showcase his musical intentions. That there's an unhealthy obsession with unearthing and having available everything single second of music recorded for a given score. We are in absolute agreement there. However, there are frequent nuanced situations:

 

- The OST album and the expansion offer totally different, but valid,  listening experiences, without one replacing the other. Example: E.T., Jaws

 

- The OST album was severely lacking in the way it presented the score (due to various factors, like short length, odd sequencing, lacking in sound quality, over-reliance on the inclusion of pop songs for commercial purposes, etc.), and only through the expanded edition did the score really come to fruition. Examples: The Shadow, A.I.

 

- The OST already presented a good distillation of the score and great listening experience, but the expanded edition made the whole architecture of the score come to life, to the point tracks already included on the OST are given a new whole dimension due to the context that surrounds them. Examples: Dracula, The Lost World.

 

- The OST was a great album, but the score is simply too sprawling and plentiful in riches to the be contained to a single cd. Examples: The Empire Strikes Back, The Phantom Menace, Hook.

 

- The OST was a perfect summation of the score and the extra music on the expanded edition, while interesting on its own, did not improve the listening experience. Examples: Ran, Batman, Jurassic Park.

 

- The OST was a great album, but the choice of tracks included was influenced by other factors besides purely musical flow, so a better album assembly might have been possible had all the elements been available for inclusion. Examples: Sphere.

 

- The OST was a great album assembly and the expanded score actually made the score seem worse. Examples: Masada, The Black Cauldron, The Fury.

 

- The OST was a good presentation of the score and listening experience, but the expanded edition, while not being a perfect listening experience on its own, presents enough valid extra material for one's own improved playlist. Examples: Bram Stoker's Dracula, The Thin Red Line.

 

- The expanded edition presents alternates that are great to listen on their own, even when completely removed from an album program. Examples: The Matrix Reloaded, Blade Runner.

 

This is just meant to illustrate the plethora of nuances that might exist when discussing the merits and shortcomings of expanded editions. There can be no general stance or answer that applies to all situations.

 

 

 

 

[Thor 7,457]

3 minutes ago, Brundlefly said:

It's not about absolute truth, but we all use that term regularily and understand what we're referring to, still you seem to enjoy bringing up how much you disagree on that certain way we use it, although it's by definition applicable and comprehensible within this forum.

 

My point was - and is - that it's a subjective term. If people here take it to mean 'complete', I'm fine with that. If people take it to mean 'the best', 'the pinnacle', 'the authoritative' - as is its most common use - well then I have an issue with that, as it pertains to C&C releases. That is not, and will never be, my 'definitive' way to release a soundtrack.

 

3 minutes ago, Brundlefly said:

I would really like you to relinquish repeating your views on expansions and everything that surrounds it in the future. That would be really nice, because in the end you don't add anything to the conversation, except that you don't like expansions, which is something that everybody knows for sure by now and will never ever forget.

 

Why should I relinquish anything? As long as they keep releasing my favourite scores in a format I despise, I'm going to say something. Although - in recent years - I largely ignore such threads in the first place, alternatively entering and speaking about the score or film's general qualities instead.

 

My advice is: Stop making a big deal out of it. It's just two different ways of appreciating soundtracks. Let me say my piece, and move on. If I can tolerate a million threads and posts about expanded releases, you can surely tolerate the occasional criticism of it. Don't take it personally.

[Jay 37,271]

5 minutes ago, Romão said:

 

 

 

That is a terrific and well-written summation of the variety of aspects that different presentations of music can provide and what factors may lead to these different presenations.  The examples you provide and very excellent thought of that illustrate the ideas you are getting at perfectly.

 

I suspect Thor's response to this will be at most 2 sentences long

[bruce marshall 1,314]

7 hours ago, Jurassic Shark said:

When I listen to operas, I prefer listening the whole opera instead of an album of highlights or suites. This is sometimes the case for film scores as well, such as the perfect score to The Empire Strikes Back.

You listen to THE RING , ' complete'?!

[Brundlefly 2,385]

Spot on @Romão. And that's something @Thor doesn't seem to reflect on.

OST = perfect          C&C = trash

It's simply not as easy as that. The quality of the listening experince is not determined by the sort of the release, but by the fucking program itself.