 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I keep hoping to hear from Lukas Kendall or Mike Matessino or Jeff Bond or Neil Bulk or LLL or Doug Fake or Haineshisway... but here we are 239 replies in, and unless I missed it, nothing.
I appreciate MMM contributing to this thread.
If anybody's taking a vote, I love the C&C approach. Give me everything but the kitchen sink, and I'm sure to get that one damn cue that I loved so much. And it's a different cue for everybody, so where possible let's have it all on the CD!
Thus I completely disagree with the O.P.'s thesis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"How do you prefer your soundtracks presented?"
C&C = Complete & Chronological
A&A = Arranged & Abbreviated
There is a third option between your two choices that I don't think is captured.
And what you call "C&C" is what I would typically call "archival." There are still aesthetic choices to be made with "C&C" - tightness/transitions between tracks, relative volume of certain tracks, etc., that will make a C&C play more like an album.
Yes, absolutely. And it is always a matter of degree, and what to abbreviate. Sometimes a few slight edits and one or two creative placement and spacing decisions can give a film score release the final polish.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The topic is fine. I can understand your frustration when albums are not produced to your liking. But with such frustration I read pretty disparaging remarks about the specialty labels and generalizations which just arent true. You attract more bees with honey than with vinegar. 
