 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Enterprise" is one of, if not my all time favorite piece. It beyond all others is a piece that I keep returning to listen to over and over, coming up on 40 years now.
It is presented twice in the LLL set. The first is disc 1, track 5. This is as mixed by Bruce Botnick in 2012 from the original 16-track master., which was actually made as a backup. The second is on disc 2, track 14. This is as live-mixed by John Neal during the recording session in 1979 and recorded by Bruce Botnick, and presented on the original soundtrack album. I believe Mr. Botnick recorded this digitally straight from a mixing console feed, but he wasn't able to record the entire album that way because the musician's union was in fear that he might be trying to replace musicians with his mysterious digital device. These two tracks sound a bit different, but they are the identical take with different mixing choices employed. In fact, "The Enterprise" appears to be the only cue that is wholly the identical take in both the movie and the original 1979 soundtrack album. In the case of other cues, different takes were chosen as preferable for the album than the ones chosen as preferable for the movie.
I also believe that there was only one recorded take of the second version of "The Enterprise." There are resequenced elements of the original rejected version contained within it. Disregarding the rejected early material, I think that makes this the only one take recording of the sessions. Unless I'm wrong about this, Goldsmith may have been revising during unrecorded rehearsals, but he wasn't revising based on playbacks of previous takes. I saw a video a while back on youtube, where at the end of a recording take (for "The River Wild" if I'm remember correctly) Goldsmith says something to the effect of "I just want everyone to notice that was ONE TAKE. ONE!" I wish I could find that again. He obviously took pride in being able to get the perfect performance in a single take, so I expect he had a lot of pride in the final version of "The Enterprise."
I haven't seen the annotated score, and I don't have any idea of its background or source, nor what the normal route is for a published score from a motion picture. Is it possible that a different orchestration was made specifically for concert performances, and that's what is contained in the annotated score? To me that would seem to fit along the lines of the common practices of using different takes, or even recording completely separate performances for film and album. Note the differences between the album and screen versions of "Capricorn One." I find it common to hear noticeable and significant differences in how film and TV scores are performed in the concert hall and during re-recordings vs. their original recordings for screen and album.
Also regarding the quiet flute, I think Bernard Hermann pioneered the recording of an instrument or group of instruments in the orchestra and using the mixing process to change its volume relative to the rest of the mix. I think it's very possible that the quietness of the flute was a purposeful mixing decision. Bruce Botnick would be the person to ask since he was at the original recording sessions, and did the 2012 mix for the LLL set.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Feb 22, 2019 - 12:11 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mducharme
(Member)
|
Is it possible that a different orchestration was made specifically for concert performances, and that's what is contained in the annotated score? To me that would seem to fit along the lines of the common practices of using different takes, or even recording completely separate performances for film and album. Note the differences between the album and screen versions of "Capricorn One." I find it common to hear noticeable and significant differences in how film and TV scores are performed in the concert hall and during re-recordings vs. their original recordings for screen and album.
No, I really do not think that was the case here. The score that I have is 40BR, dated October 23, 1979. This was two days before the recording session for the cue, which recorded version 40BR on October 25, 1979. Given that the copyists needed a few days to get all of the parts made, there would not have been time for another revision before the recording. This is certainly the score that went into the recording session. The score is an exact match for the concert recording on Frontiers, but as detailed in previous posts is very slightly different than what is heard on the OST and in the film, even though the score version ID (40BR) is an exact match for what was recorded on that date (40BR). Therefore, the changes were likely made during the session. There were three "slates" (89, 90 and 91) just before the final take (slate 92) used on the album or film. I imagine that the changes I am discussing here were made during these early three slates and after these changes were made, the final take heard in the score and album was done.
It is not terribly unusual for even the best composers to make a few small changes to the score based on the initial run-through. Obviously they want it to be 99% there and so it is important that all the details are present because there is no time for substantial alterations, but other than the instrument change from English Horn to French Horn for that one thematic statement (which would probably require verbally dictating notes to the French Horn player or scribbling them in the part), any changes made would have taken only a couple seconds to communicate to the performers and were no big deal.
Also regarding the quiet flute, I think Bernard Hermann pioneered the recording of an instrument or group of instruments in the orchestra and using the mixing process to change its volume relative to the rest of the mix. I think it's very possible that the quietness of the flute was a purposeful mixing decision. Bruce Botnick would be the person to ask since he was at the original recording sessions, and did the 2012 mix for the LLL set.
This is somewhat unlikely for the reason that it is actually fairly tricky to make things quieter in the mix. When you have spot mic's, you can make something louder, but making something quieter is a lot of work since it would require making everything else louder. If the flutes were too loud at the beginning, Goldsmith likely said in the session "nix the flutes in the first 10 bars" because that type of thing is otherwise a *lot* of work to try to fix, and the results will likely be less than spectacular.
It would be wonderful if there happened to be raw audio recording from "The Enterprise" recording session that might capture Goldsmith's verbal instructions to the orchestra, ex. recordings of aborted takes from slate 89-91.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 22, 2019 - 3:37 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
townerbarry
(Member)
|
Hello,
I notice a few apparent changes made to the cue "The Enterprise" that seem to have been made on the scoring stage.
About 3 seconds in, to my ears, the flutes present in the score do not seem to be in the recording. The viola harmonics, the synthesizer, and the vibraphone and piano are there, but I do not hear the flutes. In that register, the flutes should be especially prominent as well - especially the first note, C7, which would be extremely loud on regular flute, nowhere close to the marked 'p' dynamic. The Fimucité live recording on YouTube to my ear places a piccolo on the original top flute line and removes the other two flute parts, and even then, the piccolo line really stands out. This seems to confirm that if there was a flute or piccolo present at that point in the original recording, they should be prominent enough to be clearly audible, and they are not, at least to my ears.
Then 42 seconds in, the theme is played with a solo english horn according to the score, but in the recording it is clearly played by a solo french horn instead. This is extremely apparent to the ear and was certainly a change made on the scoring stage. The Fimucité live recording on YouTube doesn't incorporate this change and uses an english horn instead of a french horn.
Does anybody know more about these changes, or about other changes made to this cue while on the scoring stage? I was actually really surprised to see Goldsmith writing such a high note for flute at 'p' dynamic, he certainly would have known that flutes cannot play that C7 note quietly - unless there is some absolutely amazing flautist in LA who can actually manage that?
Thanks!
The answer to all your wonderful question...is this fellow here.
John Neal
Once Again I Saved Planet Earth.
A English Horn is in the Oboe Family, it is a double Reed and Below nags to the Woodwinds. Not a Horn.
French Horn is in the Brass Family.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 22, 2019 - 2:25 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mducharme
(Member)
|
But the English horn and french horn are alwasy playing notes a fifth over the real sound
which make them behave identical
that means and English horn could receive the french horn sheet part and just play it
They are the same transposition, yes, but the line was written in the English horn part and given to the French horn. The English horn player could not give the French horn player their part b/c they would have music they have to play on the same page. They might have made a photocopy for the French horn player, but the French horn player would have to switch from the English horn part to the French horn part immediately since all French horns are in immediately following the final "English horn" note, so the French horn performer would have to switch from the "English horn" part to the French horn part immediately, with no rest, probably with the french horn entry being midway through a different page. Not impossible, but potentially risky in performance. Penciling it into the French horn part would avoid these risks.
The other possibility is that Goldsmith may have wanted to experiment with this line and had the copyist write it into the French horn part in advance with a "play only if cued" indication. In that case, the line would have been in the part already, and the only thing to do in the session would be Goldsmith telling the horn player to play the "play if cued" passage and asking the English horn to rest in those bars.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Feb 22, 2019 - 3:40 PM
|
|
|
|
By: |
mducharme
(Member)
|
And your statement is incorrect..I know several musicians who can multi instruments. Your statement is ridiculous.
I during Marching Season was On Percussions...And Concert Season I played the Clarinet.
Yes, there are people who are multi-instrumentalists. The LA session musicians are all at a very advanced level, and whoever played that line is obviously a top pro French Horn player (just based on the intonation etc.). It is one thing to be able to play multiple instruments reasonably well and another to be at the level of those performers. To be at that level usually requires a lot of commitment to that instrument. French horn is also a much more difficult instrument to play than most others. So yes, it is possible that the English horn and oboe player could also play French horn, but given the difficulty in playing French horn and the time it would take to get to that level of competence, it is somewhat unlikely that you would find this particular combination in a LA session pro who can play that high level of both. I would expect the time taken to really perfect that level of French horn playing would probably preclude being at the same level on English horn and Oboe. Obviously I don't know for sure without knowing who played that line and knowing what instruments they can play, but it is unlikely compared to other possibilities.
A more likely possibility is there may have actually been a seventh French horn player (an "assistant first horn") at the session who could have taken the written French horn 1 part while the first French horn played the page from the English horn part. This would allow them to play from a photocopy of the page of the English horn part, and they wouldn't have to enter immediately after to find their place. The need for the seventh French horn for this passage alone may explain why the change was not written into the score. It would be possible with only six horn players instead of seven, but would require that one player switch immediately from playing the last note of the melody to playing a counterline with no rest in between, maybe possible but far from ideal. Having an assistant first horn is fairly common these days in the classical, but I'm not sure what the Hollywood norm is or what it was in '79.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A more likely possibility is there may have actually been a seventh French horn player (an "assistant first horn") at the session who could have taken the written French horn 1 part while the first French horn played the page from the English horn part. This would allow them to play from a photocopy of the page of the English horn part, and they wouldn't have to enter immediately after to find their place. The need for the seventh French horn for this passage alone may explain why the change was not written into the score. It would be possible with only six horn players instead of seven, but would require that one player switch immediately from playing the last note of the melody to playing a counterline with no rest in between, maybe possible but far from ideal. Having an assistant first horn is fairly common these days in the classical, but I'm not sure what the Hollywood norm is or what it was in '79.
The musician credits in the LLL liner notes lists only 13 French horn players. There is no listing for "English Horn" or anything else I believe would correspond.
Jeff Bond who participates in this forum might be another good resource for addressing this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The musician credits do not list an oboist? The English horn is generally played by an oboist - in this case the third oboe doubles on English horn.
6 musicians are listed under "Oboes."
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
