 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 9, 2004 - 2:48 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Thor
(Member)
|
One thing that has always perplexed me in all these years, is the fascination that some of you have for the TECHNICAL details of old soundtrack albums or sound systems or visual formats or whatever. There are HUNDREDS of threads like that, and they usually go on for ages (take a look at the recent QUO VADIS thread, for example). The participants are usually in the 50+ age group and almost exclusively American. One may go something like this:
Mr. X: "The main theme was available on an ancient 45, which was remixed from deteriorated stereo channels from the master tapes at Paramount"
Mr. Y :"That's right, but the rights for the entire score were purchased by Universal in 1951, and using the new Panavision 52B-system, the deteriorated left audio channel was restored shortly thereafter"...
Etcetera, etcetera...you get the picture. Even though things like this might be interesting on occasion (as an addendum to the discussion, but not a prerogative), I've never really understood the fascination, to be honest. For me, personally, what matters is the MUSIC itself...either how it appears on album or - within a completely different paradigm - how it functions in the movie.
Is this an age thing or an American thing? What don't I get?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's called a fetish.
Americans are into gadgets.
Eureopeans are into sex
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 9, 2004 - 5:10 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Joe E.
(Member)
|
In seriousness, Thor, I think it has something to do with the fact so many of the regulars here are people in the business, who actually work(ed) on or with this stuff - manderley, Joe Caps, Ford Thaxton, Ray Faiola, The Blue Mule, Lukas Kendall, Jeff Bond, and any number of others here work on films, soundtrack releases, and/or whatnot. I'm guessing it's almost shop talk to them.
I sometimes almost wonder whether mere mortal heathen unwashed like ourselves are entirely welcome here (though I've never been given actual reason to think so - well, except maybe from Ford...); it's as though we're intruding in some secret domain. I almost feel as though I should go out and make a movie just so I be a full member of the club...
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
While I haven't hit 50 yet, Thor, I think a lot of this comes from the fact that in the pre-CD era, film music and film collectors are often one and the same so that there is an obsession with not only the permutations of any available version of a score but also the film and the production details behind a certain production.
I think this mindset is still present in younger fans (and non-American ones just as well), but they just happen to be more interested in the details of more recent materials because this is what they grew up with and made that all valuable impression in youth that later lead to a love of film and music.
Really, think about it, how many fans of film music do you know that are not also film buffs? Sure, they exist, but I'll bet the ranks are rather meager.
Many film composers aren't necessarily big film buffs, but they were usually recruited from concert hall or acedemic circles. While others (i.e., Les Baxter), were film buffs of the highest order and actively sought film work because they loved films so much. Les told me that when the film permitted, he considered his work every bit as serious as any of his symphonies, operas and concertos and other symphonic, concert hall works, of which he had quite a few.
I don't think this really covers you question, Thor, but I think it gets to some of what you were asking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 9, 2004 - 5:13 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Jostein
(Member)
|
In seriousness, Thor, I think it has something to do with the fact so many of the regulars here are people in the business, who actually work(ed) on or with this stuff - manderley, Joe Caps, Ford Thaxton, Ray Faiola, The Blue Mule, Lukas Kendall, Jeff Bond, and any number of others here work on films, soundtrack releases, and/or whatnot. I'm guessing it's almost shop talk to them.
I sometimes almost wonder whether mere mortal heathen unwashed like ourselves are entirely welcome here (though I've never been given actual reason to think so - well, except maybe from Ford...); it's as though we're intruding in some secret domain. I almost feel as though I should go out and make a movie just so I be a full member of the club...
Nah, we are the fans, and we're just as important, because we buy the CDs 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 9, 2004 - 5:45 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
manderley
(Member)
|
.....Just be lucky you're not a film collector. Then you'd have to suffer through endless discussions of "lowfade", "IB Tech", "vinegar syndrome", "hot splice or guillotine", "adapted scope" and "printdown is a collector's term!!".....
....."Rivas cut", "sound slug", "SMPTE leader", "NMT / NET", "trademark logo", "variable area", "variable density", "mint condition", "replacement footage", and the ubiquitous, but nonsensical term, "CRI Tech"...... 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOL!!!
No, seriously....
Speaking as someone who had an, albeit brief, film making career.....
Yes, film making is an incredibly complex, TECHNOLOGICAL, field. People in these types of jobs tend to talk shop.
If you have ever sweated out a re-recording session with a bored mixer (see Albert Brooks' MODERN LOVE), you share a special background. Like soldiers.
So the fascination with arcana goes with the territory.
Brace yourself, Thor.
With the arrival of DVD's and their accompanying commentary tracks and "making of.." featurettes, I fear the problem is only going to get worse!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Glad to hear it Howard L!
Sometimes when I read my own posts- where I am debating such arcane facts as whether a film was released in 35mm 4-track or 70mm 6 track-I wonder whether you guys think we're crazy bores.
Not that I care what you think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Jan 10, 2004 - 2:34 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Ron Pulliam
(Member)
|
Thor, you asked for a serious response:
I think the answer is as simple as there are various categories of collectors. There are some collectors who want every single issue of every single release, which includes the same release with different covers...the more the better.
There are collectors here who are seriously dedicated to the preservation of the art form and have devoted their lives toward ensuring as much gets saved, and preserved on CDs available to the fan base, as possible. These are the Ray Faiolas and Craig Spauldings and Ford Thaxtons and M.V. Gerhards and Robert Townsons and Nick Redmans and our very own Lukas Kendalls and Jeff Bonds.
There are others of us who are wholly and entirely indebted to those above because we love all that music that they preserve and we love all the manifestations of recording media that this music was released upon. Many of us grew up with 78 rpms being the first available LPs and we watched 33 1/3 and 45s move in, then stereophonic sound and now we have CDs and MP3s. We know the sound is cleaner and, in some cases, better in the newer presentation media BUT the packaging is often lacking and much too small to appreciate. We love finding mint copies of 78 rpm issues of "Captain From Castile" and "Duel in the Sun," we love finding various picture covers of singles and EP tracks of score music on 45 rpms. And we know -- because we have them in our collections -- that LP covers were far superior and fill a place in our hearts that mere CD inserts can never do. And yes, we maintain the proper equipment upon which these treasures may still be played!
And then there are the newer fans who know nothing about what went before and don't care. If it gets issued on CD, that's fine. But only a few care about obtaining a phonograph and seeking out LP issues that have not been -- and may never be -- issued on CD.
And there are one or two "fans" who frequent the discussion forums and are full of bonhommie. They post regularly/frequently about current compostions/composers but they like to throw zingers at the older guys, especially when they are disagreed with. And they cannot stand for people to like something they detest. The more positive a discussion a score generates, the more negative and upset they become. You may have encountered someone like this in this forum.
They never express any great knowledge of, or appreciation for, how the art form has developed. It's all bells and whistles and whatever is affordable at the time...even to go so far as to offering up opinions on new releases without having heard them or holding them in their hands.
They are casual fans, at best, and sometimes make comments that would imply they consider anyone who takes it more seriously is, somehow, "wrong."
Call my observation what you will. The true fans aren't bothered by them...just mildly amused by their musings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You see, when the anamorphotic zoomar lenses were fit to the stereophonic audiophile, they could not connect them to the MII system used in the 80s, and the BVU system used a different tape-width of 3/4 inch, therefore the DTS optical output didn't fit in the HDTV input because it utilises 1250 lines instead of the 625 that PAL uses and as a result the CCU could not correct the image properly, hence the development of the nonliniar editing stations like AVID wich does handle dolly shots the same as the cranes, or can make multiple mattes work out better than that of a regular turntable at as speed of 45 in the monaural environment, wich will take some extra takes before it's a wrap and people can go to lunch finally...
Hey, where did you all go? Come back!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe not very funny...
Of course many technological inventions came from the USA. The fondness of technical stuff may be something particular to Americans. The interest in technicalities may also come from the curiosity to find out how the music you're playing comes to the ear. IMHO
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
