 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 31, 2008 - 5:11 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
Honestly, I´m not in the right mood to (re-)read all those postings (again) - HOWEVER I really can´t imagine any good argument that would speak against a CD like I suggested: a composer-selected "main part" followed by "bonus tracks" consisting of all the remaining music available. If you still fear people may find the music to be too repetitive or redundant you could even put a red sticker on the CD-case saying "Warning! Do not listen to the bonus tracks!".
And if you'd actually read the thread, you would have seen that I adressed this earlier. In theory, I agree with you. The IDEAL presentation would be the re-arranged album PLUS the complete score on separate discs - much like they did on THE FURY or GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD. Pleases both camps. However, this is not very feasible in praxis most of the time. It will be too expensive to produce and it will be too expensive for the consumer. Hence, I have to make a priority regarding what I want to see released on the market, and I obviously go for the re-arranged albums.
So what? So you do need someone who pre-selects the music for you? You really do need to be spoon-feeded? I feel sorry for you...
Rather than respond to this, I again urge you to read the thread. It's all explained there.
I have no problem with you chiming in here, but at least have the courtesy to update yourself on what has been said and what the arguments are, and then I'd be happy to take it from there. If you're not in the "mood" for reading this thread, well then what is your point in participating in the first place?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 31, 2008 - 5:39 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
At least we now agree "in theory". I don´t understand why such an album - which pleases us both - should be more expensive than an album which contains ALL the music in chronological order??? The third version ("re-arranged album") of course is the one I like the least.
I'm no expert on these industry things, but I would think that a multiple-CD set with BOTH the complete score on one (or several CD's) and then another CD with the re-arranged "listening experience", in the same elaborate packaging, perhaps double rights issues and so on would be more expensive to produce than just a re-arranged album or just a C&C presentation. And then, in turn, more expensive for us to buy. But hey....nothing would please me more if there is indeed no difference. I wonder why we see so few of them, though?
I don´t understand your point of view.
Well, if you read the thread, you would hopefully understand it better.
I guess this topic will have been discussed on different boards for many years. Did you really read ALL of those (hundreds) of postings all those years? And if you didn´t: does this mean you should not participate here either? And if one argument exists in this thread which proves my argument 100% invalid why not telling me in one short sentence?
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean here. This thread is one particular discussion of the topic, with its own set of arguments. Other threads on the topic are irrelevant. Hey, there are many discussions on the same topic in the world. Doesn't mean all discussions are the same.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Jon Bell's nasty picture.]
Is that really necessary?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You bet your ass I would!! If I thought for one minute that I was a better album producer than, let's say John Williams or Danny Elfman, that would be the day I phased out of film music for good.
Not sure about Elfman (it'd have to be a score I'd want to listen to a lot), but I wouldn't mind being John Williams' album editor for the next couple of albums.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 1, 2008 - 4:30 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
That´s exactely the point I was trying to make. So why not call it "a new discussion" starting from - let´ s say - page six of this thread ? One particular discussion of the topic, with its own set of arguments! Pages 1 to 5 are irrelevant. After all your original thread stems from 2000. Time for something completely fresh and new! 
Ehm...no, this thread is only ONE discussion with many different arguments and tangents. There is always a logical progression, and you just don't jump in about 5 pages out with attacks, questions and lashes against something that has been adressed and thoroughly debated earlier. That doesn't put you in the best sort of light. The courteous thing would be to read through it all, find the arguments you don't agree with (or agree with), quote it or them and then we'll take it from there. It will also prevent me from repeating stuff that I've already said earlier. But just to let you know, I'll be gone for a week now, I won't get back to you before Thursday, at the earliest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 1, 2008 - 5:42 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
follow me
(Member)
|
Ehm...no, this thread is only ONE discussion with many different arguments and tangents. There is always a logical progression, and you just don't jump in about 5 pages out with attacks, questions and lashes against something that has been adressed and thoroughly debated earlier. That doesn't put you in the best sort of light. The courteous thing would be to read through it all, find the arguments you don't agree with (or agree with), quote it or them and then we'll take it from there. It will also prevent me from repeating stuff that I've already said earlier. But just to let you know, I'll be gone for a week now, I won't get back to you before Thursday, at the earliest.
I think I have said everything of importance that can be said from my point of view. It doesn´t really make sense to me to dive into this topic any deeper (regardless what sort of light this may put me in - I only hope it is warm, sunny light). I also do not understand why we MUST stick to an EIGHT years old thread with its old arguments and tangents...is it really such a big problem to start a new discussion on this topic after EIGHT years and maybe repeat one or two of the most important arguments (shock! ) ? Maybe some participants have even changed their mind in the meantime!
Or do you intend to create some kind of an "extended score bible" here so that people of the 23rd century can visit this holy thread?
Only one thing is left for me to say: there are a lot of scores which only develop their full beauty in their "extended" or (almost) "complete" form. e.g. THE GOOD THE BAD AND THE UGLY or ON HER MAJESTY´S SECRET SERVICE. Twice as good in the extended version then in the "old" version I.M.H.O.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
