 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 22, 2019 - 6:33 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
BlindDoc
(Member)
|
I read somewhere it was 20-minute chunks rather than 15-minute chunks, but I could be mistaken.
Oh, how I miss those days. Physical and industry limitations gave birth to this wonderful array of great, creative, concise reconceptualizations of the scores.
I know where you're getting at - and i agree that a lot of scores profit greatly from "concept/re-aranged" album formats.
But the problem with those 30-minute scores often was, that a lot of times there were very important and lengthy cues missing, often ones that employed choirs/full orchestras, as that would have added yet more cost. I remember being sorely disappointed by Varese's "Deadly Friend" LP, which not only omitted all orchestral elements, but also several layers of certain tracks. In hindsight, some (not all, of course) of those short albums nowadays come across as mere teasers / appetizers for their respective scores. Others were a great listening experience. A perfect listening length for me is 45 - 50 minutes, if grippingly (i'm sure that word doesn't exist) arranged. I for one love to have both worlds - full score on one disc and album on another. It also shows you the composer's train of thought how to arrange the seperate "bricks" of the score cues into a fully built album. Hence you get a) all the music and b) an education on how to (or how not to) arrange an album.
Best,
Burnie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Jan 22, 2019 - 7:16 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Solium
(Member)
|
I read somewhere it was 20-minute chunks rather than 15-minute chunks, but I could be mistaken.
Oh, how I miss those days. Physical and industry limitations gave birth to this wonderful array of great, creative, concise reconceptualizations of the scores.
I know where you're getting at - and i agree that a lot of scores profit greatly from "concept/re-aranged" album formats.
But the problem with those 30-minute scores often was, that a lot of times there were very important and lengthy cues missing, often ones that employed choirs/full orchestras, as that would have added yet more cost. I remember being sorely disappointed by Varese's "Deadly Friend" LP, which not only omitted all orchestral elements, but also several layers of certain tracks. In hindsight, some (not all, of course) of those short albums nowadays come across as mere teasers / appetizers for their respective scores. Others were a great listening experience. A perfect listening length for me is 45 - 50 minutes, if grippingly (i'm sure that word doesn't exist) arranged. I for one love to have both worlds - full score on one disc and album on another. It also shows you the composer's train of thought how to arrange the seperate "bricks" of the score cues into a fully built album. Hence you get a) all the music and b) an education on how to (or how not to) arrange an album.
Best,
Burnie
You're wasting your breath if that was a direct response to Thor. He's got his fingers in his ears and shouting, "Lalalalalalala, I can't hear you!".
In retrospect I really enjoy some of those 30 minutes scores and gone back to them. I also think the 45-50 minute album length is probably the best compromise.
But some scores require the complete/expanded treatment as well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure Lukas once said (maybe in that old "soundtrack-info booklet" thing you'd get with a FSM subscription, but I can't remember for sure) that you could get 5, 10 or 15 minute chunks. 2 x 15 minutes, as stated above, made the most economic sense. Sometimes a label may want to buy an extra 5 minutes of music, or 10, but I assume you'd get better value to the dollar in the larger 15 blocks of music.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
