 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If I was intrada I will going to John Williams and I would ask for a donation about some classical scores of golden age. I am sure that he will give a lot of money for his favorite composers. After all the money who earns every year is 80.000.000 dollars
John Williams earns 80.000.000 Dollars every year? I don't think so. Would be nice, but... no way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Williams earns 80.000.000 Dollars every year? I don't think so. Would be nice, but... no way.
It's from the rights! Don't forget is John Williams the man who composed music for the 9 star wars
Oh, John Williams did those?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course Jerry Goldsmith's name automatically attracts more attention than Hugo Friedhofer's. He will also sell more CDs. But even a Goldsmith re-recording of an old TV score or film score is still far from "low fruit".
|
|
|
|
|
|
Where did I say that? Of course the Goldsmith name makes a difference (and so does the Rozsa name, Herrmann name, or Korngold name — that’s why the majority of re-recordings have been of these composers — they sell, they are likely to at least lose less money than a re-recording will typically lose).
We know that James Fitzpatrick considered Waxman’s Taras Bulba disappointing sales-wise, so I guess Waxman, however great a composer, isn’t in that group — even when it’s one of his greatest scores. We know Friedhofer and even Alfred Newman (sob) aren’t. Tiomkin has gotten a decent number of rerecordings recently but we know that sales of both The Alamo and Fall of the Roman Empire were very disappointing, and I’d be surprised if Duel in the Sun or Intrada’s Dial M for Murder significantly bucked that trend.
But this is my point — all rerecordings are a ton of work and almost all rerecordings *lose* money (it’s only a matter of degree…the Conans and I think maybe eventually Lawrence of Arabia and El Cid are the only Tadlow projects that turned a profit according to James*). They are all done as labors of love which aren’t even expected to turn a profit — NONE of them are “low hanging fruit”. None of them are easy (that’s why they happen infrequently) and they all take a ton more work than releasing existing recordings from the studio vaults (a Goldsmith score for MGM is low hanging fruit — that’s why you keep seeing those reissued).
*if any re-recording *might* be considered lowER hanging fruit (but only in retrospect) it might be the Thriller volumes. They were still a ton of work for Leigh Phillips to reconstruct but he recently revealed on The Goldsmith Odyssey that the first volume managed to turn a profit because of the small orchestra size, which is why a second volume happened not too long after.
Doug and Roger didn’t select this Goldsmith twofer because they thought it’d be easy. And Leigh Phillips recently wrote on Facebook that he’s been spending nine hours a day recently working to reconstruct The Man, as short as it is. “Low-hanging fruit” indeed.
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 10, 2021 - 1:13 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
.
(Member)
|
A company made up of incredibly devoted film music fans (who could be you or me, if we had the energy to start our own label) offers an opportunity for like-minded fans to support (with very reasonable terms) a recording project some of them may have a similar passion for. If enough people want it, the album gets recorded, and everybody gets what they want. If not (because participation is entirely voluntary), then that’s the end of that.
And yet somehow, for some here, this is all seen as evidence of something sinister. It's confusing to me.
This place is fueled on cynicism for far too many.
No-one can complain if a label decides it wants to record a particular piece of music. It's their choice. People support it or not. Either way, everyone should welcome a label going full steam ahead with a recording project of their choosing. Their choice would presumably be a reflection of their identity and targets and budget etc.
Instead, they held a so-called poll, giving the illusion that it was us, the audience that would have an important say in the final choice of material chosen. But all this did was ensure that in the end, we had far more actual poll participants who did NOT vote for the "winning" score, than who voted for it. Which of course, invites an entirely predictable and occasionally heated back-and-forth discussion as to the merits or otherwise of the final selection. After all, for some people, they see this as THEIR choice that's being questioned, not Intrada's.
I suggest we don't need a poll next time. The Kickstarter itself already serves as the only poll that matters, doesn't it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judging from the film I watched last night, The Man sounded to me like someone had pasted on a selection of poorly-integrated music library snippets.
I'm surprised if you think that about even the poetic Lincoln Memorial sequence. Maybe the music will leave a better impression on you in a new recording, music-only, than it does mixed with the film in a TV broadcast recording (it's a shame the film has never been released on Blu-ray or even DVD; the YouTube quality is pretty poor.)
I'll look forward to Black Patch though.
Glad to hear it! I confess I'm looking forward to that more out of the two as well. The central theme is just breathtaking in romantic form.
No-one can complain if a label decides it wants to record a particular piece of music. It's their choice. People support it or not. Either way, everyone should welcome a label going full steam ahead with a recording project of their choosing. Their choice would presumably be a reflection of their identity and targets and budget etc.
Are you kidding? That's exactly what Intrada did for their first Kickstarter -- Dial M for Murder was selected without any input from their customers... and TONS of people complained. Even a bunch of the Tiomkin fans said, "This isn't the Tiomkin I would have picked!" See for yourself:
https://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=130160&forumID=1&archive=0
Instead, they held a so-called poll, giving the illusion that it was us, the audience that would have an important say in the final choice of material chosen.
Illusion? “So-called”? The winner of the poll ended up being their next Kickstarter! The audience absolutely DID have a say, even though Roger did make sure to include the following (bolded by me) caveat in his original poll post, that other factors might affect the next choice:
"Not that we're going to dive right into another Kickstarter right away (especially since I want to see how the costs actually come out compared to the budget), but thought I would get a preliminary sense of popularity on a few titles. You can vote for up to three. This is just to get an early pulse. Don't be offended if ultimately we don't chose the most popular title, as there are a lot of factors that go into what to record that goes beyond the most popular. I would love to do Jungle Book, but it's big with chorus and could easily cost $20K more than the more straight forward Dial M...making it possibly harder to raise the funds for, even if more popular. Not that that wouldn't stop us from trying necessarily. . Feel free to write in any suggestions in the thread itself, we'll watch and ponder. We aren't considering titles that elements exist or have good enough releases out already (sorry...no Lionheart). In the meantime, we have work to do to get Dial M going."
http://www.intrada.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7967
But all this did was ensure that in the end, we had far more poll participants who did NOT vote for the chosen score, than who voted for it.
Actually, that's not even true. More math for ya... there were 372 votes, as you'll see:
http://www.intrada.net/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7967
But that's because people were allowed to vote for three choices -- 372/3 = 124 people voting. And 76 of those 124 people selected Black Patch as one of their three choices. That's over 61% of participants in the poll, with 48 of them not voting for Black Patch.
Which of course, invites an entirely predictable and occasionally heated back-and-forth discussion as to the merits or otherwise of the final selection.
Again, that happened last time *anyway* -- I'm amazed you don't remember.
After that (and after it looked touch-and-go there for a while about Dial M for Murder even being successful on Kickstarter -- it was over halfway through the 30 days when it even reached the halfway funding mark) Intrada decided for their NEXT Kickstarter, they would hold an informal poll to see what, among the titles they were interested in to tackle, might be the most successful.
After all, for some people, they see this as THEIR choice that's being questioned, not Intrada's.
I suggest we don't need a poll next time. The Kickstarter itself already serves as the only poll that matters, doesn't it?
Not if Intrada wants to save themselves some trouble by figuring out what would be more likely to be successful on Kickstarter, before going to the trouble of actually creating the Kickstarter campaign. Really surprised you don't see the logic in this, and the results frankly can't be argued with: Black Patch / The Man took just over 24 hours to reach 50% funding, while Dial M for Murder (selected without any input from the larger film music community) took over 432 hours to reach 50% funding! I'd say Intrada's little poll was a successful strategy. What I find particularly amusing though is that YOU yourself suggested something similar, in your September 15th post (1:52pm) in this thread:
https://www.filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?forumID=1&pageID=7&threadID=130160&archive=0
"It would be good if FSM could have its own Kickstarter for re-recording titles of it's members' own choice, say once a year, with the raised money subsequently handed to a Tadlow or an Intrada (or a Lukas Kendall) to produce.
That meaningless poll panel on the FSM home page could then become the voting place for the next title to be re-recorded.
The labels currently tell us which scores they want to re-record, but maybe we should be telling them what WE want re-recorded." -- Basil Wrathbone
So you would seem to be directly contradicting yourself, Basil -- which is it? Or will you merely offer criticism, and say things should have been done differently, either way?
Some people always seem to think they know how to do something better than the people who have actually worked in an industry for decades and decades...
Yavar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh man, roll on June 2022, how quickly can it come, lol!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It seems incredible to me how sour some people seemingly have become over something that's only there to bring joy: music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
If you want to get picky, when did I say any of those titles were low hanging fruit? I said the Goldsmith name is low-hanging fruit. You both acknowledge there's an existing fan base and market for Goldsmith which influences why he gets chosen for releases and re-recordings. But you don't think this really effects why he gets chosen for releases and rerecordings. Okay...
WTF? Yavar literally said of course the Goldsmith name makes a difference, directly up there.
But there's a big difference between a name making a difference and "low hanging fruit", the latter implies an easily accomplished and surefire successful task. Hardly an apt description for such re-recording projects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not if Intrada wants to save themselves some trouble by figuring out what would be more likely to be successful on Kickstarter, before going to the trouble of actually creating the Kickstarter campaign.
People who have never started a Kickstarter campaign seem to underestimate the amount of work it takes to actually make a successful Kickstarter campaign. You have to calculate the project through, so you can have realistic expectations, that means you have to know where scores are, what needs to be reconstructed, how difficult will it be, what kind of instruments would be needed, etc. You then have to come up with a realistic plan, set up a rewards system (which has to go into your calculation for the project), possibly ask others if and how they would support the project (for rewards, or other stuff, etc.), and, and... It's all doable, sure, but the first logical step for a film score label would be to informally check whether that's actually worthwhile, before going to the effort to actually start a Kickstarter campaign.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Aug 11, 2021 - 6:43 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Col. Flagg
(Member)
|
People who have never started a Kickstarter campaign seem to underestimate the amount of work it takes to actually make a successful Kickstarter campaign. You have to calculate the project through, so you can have realistic expectations, that means you have to know where scores are, what needs to be reconstructed, how difficult will it be, what kind of instruments would be needed, etc. You then have to come up with a realistic plan, set up a rewards system (which has to go into your calculation for the project), possibly ask others if and how they would support the project (for rewards, or other stuff, etc.), and, and... It's all doable, sure, but the first logical step for a film score label would be to informally check whether that's actually worthwhile, before going to the effort to actually start a Kickstarter campaign.
There's also the social component, which is the brunt of such a campaign. It's a full time job, trust me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
