Is anybody else mad about this lack of enthusiasm in "official" sites?

Before posting here did you happen to take a moment and first email webmaster@christopher-Young.com and express to them directly your comments and questions about that site and ask them to respond?

Why You Ask?

Because they very well might not read this forum and might never have seen your thoughts about that site.

If you come across a site you feel this way about, by all means TELL THE WEBMASTER directly what you think (I would suggest in a polite and direct manner if possible) and they might well respond to you and correct any problems.

If you had emailed that site you might have learned that the first webmaster who started that site has now turned it over to Dan Goldwasser who will be updating and revamping the site over the next several weeks and bringing it up to date, in much the same manner as he does for the John Ottman site.

I've covered him your comments and asked that he reply to you directly regarding them.

Sincerely Yours

If I were a BIG fan of Chris Young, and was upset that news hasn't been happening, you bet I'd be critisizing the lack of happening everywhere, from the webmaster's email box to REC.MUSIC.MOVIES!

Anyway, by reading Shaun's last line, it seems as though he's using C-Y.com as an axample to get some reaction from people regarding "Official" sites in general. I sometimes wonder why these official sites aren't updated by composers themselves. If they were built right, they don't need to learn all that weird stuff like HTML and JAVA and blah blah blah. With a simple toolset, they can update their website just as members do here on the MovieMusic profile pages.

Good thread, Seņor Ruthaferdo!

PeterK

NP - "La Dolce Vita" by Rota

Peter's right, the world of film music is quite small. Everyone knows somebody or somebody who KNOWS somebody. It's simply a matter of being patient and letting those folks come out of the woodwork.

It was almost a full year before the owner figuired out that his contact email address was incorrect, and there hasn't been any updates for even longer!

BTW the thing that I hate about the Chris Young site is that the sound clips never work!

P.S. Peter I've got about 10 John Scott CD reviews, can you add some to your database?

1. Peter - I didn't even KNOW about the hoopla going on at Filmtracks until Ford told me about it. (Thank you again Ford!)

2. I didn't know about this Chris YOung post until Ford told me about it, and while I'm sure Jeron would have told me sooner or later, I am actually surprised that Shaun didn't just email webmaster@christopher-young.com to begin with (which I would have done).

3. In the past, I have been mentioned in posts, news items, etc - and NEVER been told. Sometimes the only way I find out about things it by chance, and (to be honest) that kinda pisses me off.

4. No one should have ANY need to complain about any of the sites I personally maintain - all of them are updated fairly regularly because I make a point of staying in touch with the composers so that their site doesn't get (too) stale.

5. In regards to the CY site, there is a LOT of work that needs to be done BEFORE it can even be updated. That is what I am working on now, and given my rather nutty schedule all I can ask is that people be patient. I have TWO more composer sites expected to fully launch in the next month, so I hope you can all bear with me. (Those two sites are Basil Poledouris' and ParodiFair's sites.)

6. TimT - the Chris Young site currently uses small RealAudio files. If you can't get those to work, you might need to download RealPlayer. It's fairly common. (Although I will probably be redoing all of the audio into a streaming QuickTime format - it's safer and more secure.)

Hope that clears some things up for now!

Dan, welcome to the forum. I'm surprised this is only your first post! I feel compelled to comment on your points.

1. Thank God for Ford?

2. Thank God for Ford? I am not surprised Shaun didn't email the webmaster. Not everyone online is the same. There are more differences online than any other place in the whole world, simply because of the virtual nature of the thing where more people can "exist" in one place at the same time.

3. Would you be pissed off if you found a glowing L.A. Times article about you? I don't think so! Good with the bad, it's part of public participation.

4. What makes a site official? Seriously, aren't they really just glorified fan sites? I never could tell with a lot of composer sites, unless of course, they were sites made and updated by composers themselves.

5. I think this is the part Shaun was looking for when he made his post.

6. While RA may be common, it still doesn't work for everyone. I would work with Tim and figure out exactly what the problem was. But that's me!

Anyway, Dan, thanks for taking the time to stop by to do what you feel you needed to do. Do come again sometime, and not just when Ford calls. It's a great place, here. Lots of good people.

PeterK

NP - "Wild Rovers" by GOldsmith

The whole point of these forums is to discuss matters like this is it not?

it is frustrating when a site you like a ton is not updated, a la Filmtracks going 3 months at a time without updates (I exaggerate a tad).
I, as a former CD reviewer (I can't really call myself a webmaster in good conscience) for my own piddly-ass site, know it is equally frustrating when you CAN'T update your site as often as you wish due to schedule conflicts.

*I erased this statement, cuz it were dumb*

NP -- Last of the Mohicans

quote:

---

Originally posted by dgoldwas:

6. TimT - the Chris Young site currently uses small RealAudio files. If you can't get those to work, you might need to download RealPlayer. It's fairly common. (Although I will probably be redoing all of the audio into a streaming QuickTime format - it's safer and more secure.)

---

Hey, if I would have known that Dan was the "new" webmaster of the Chris Young site, I WOULD HAVE emailed him, as he's extremely reliable with his replies. Maybe I'm completely off my 22-year-old rocker, but wouldn't THAT be an interesting NEWS item for the Chris Young site? Honestly.

PeterK wrote this, and with it, brings up an interesting point:
"Do come again sometime, and not just when Ford calls."

It's very late here, and my opinions are EXTREMELY jaded at this hour, but I'm not too fond of the "tattle-tale" mentality that Ford displays quite frequently. Like I said, it's late and I'm cranky, but this is something that bothers me. I doubt that Dan would ever visit a public forum outside of rec.music.movies if it weren't for people mentioning his name elsewhere and Ford running to tell him all about it (a likely email heading would be "Something That Might Be Of Significance To You"), and while some may think that that could be a good thing (getting people "in the know" on a board filled with "hopeless retards" and "fanboys" to dispel rumors and stomp on people who put down composers who they are "friends" with---this is a department where Dan earns my respect: he believes in "conflict of interest", unless he was just kidding when he said it, I haven't second-guessed him), right now, at 3:50 in the A.M., it bothers me.

Look at what happened to FILMUS, for example. Short version of the story is that all the normal people left, as a result of a certain one or two people.

Shaun

NP---Rio Conchos
This is a great score, and I'm not saying that because I once met Jerry Goldsmith, shook his hand, and took a sample of his stool (which I am currently auctioning off on eBay). I honestly love this score. He is not my best friend, regardless of what I have said in the past. He is just a person who writes music. Some of it is good (Rio Conchos), some of it is mediocre (Hollow Man), and some of it is just plain bad (Angie). That's all I have to say about that.

<<<Hey, if I would have known that Dan was the "new" webmaster of the Chris Young site, I WOULD HAVE emailed him, as he's extremely reliable with his replies. Maybe I'm completely off my 22-year-old rocker, but wouldn't THAT be an interesting NEWS item for the Chris Young site? Honestly.>>

You might wish to read Mr. Goldwasser's post, it deals with this point very directly.

Have you read it?

<<PeterK wrote this, and with it, brings up an interesting point:
"Do come again sometime, and not just when Ford calls."
It's very late here, and my opinions are EXTREMELY jaded at this hour, but I'm not too fond of the "tattle-tale" mentality that Ford displays quite frequently. Like I said, it's late and I'm cranky, but this is something that bothers me.>>>

Shaun, you posted your comments to a public forum for the entire planet to read, passing it onto the new webmaster so he can address several point you raised is hardly what I would "tattle-tale", are you ashamed of what you wrote?

Are you saying you didn't want him to read what you posted?

<<I doubt that Dan would ever visit a public forum outside of rec.music.movies if it weren't for people mentioning his name elsewhere and Ford running to tell him all about it (a likely email heading would be "Something That Might Be Of Significance To You"), and while some may think that that could be a good thinm (getting people "in the know" on a board filled with "hopeless retards" and "fanboys" to dispel rumors and stomp on people who put down composers who they are "friends" with---this is a department where Dan earns my respect: he believes in "conflict of interest", unless he was just kidding when he said it, I haven't second-guessed him), right now, at 3:50 in the A.M., it bothers me.>>

All I did was forward your own words which you posted of your own free will to him directly and asked him to address them with you.

It's a way of clearing up misunderstandings in my experience.

Regards

I re-read Dan's post. I realize that he wrote that there was a lot of work to be done BEFORE the updating, but I'm referring to a "note of caution" to anyone else who brings traffic to that site who could be disgruntled at the lack of updating.

Something like:

"Hey, sorry for the 'no updato', wacky stuff happened. Stay tuned!"

are you ashamed of what you wrote?

Why? I think that once again we might have to play Who's The Hypocrite? I'm posting opinions here, man. The only posts I see from you are in threads where you either write the words "I should know, I produced it" or you are saying that "such-and-such would very much like to hear what you are saying about his work". You are not elite because you have produced albums. If you love film music, why are all of your posts self-congratulatory (in a seemingly roundabout way, such as your posts elsewhere regarding Bless The Child) or condescending? Ever feel the need to make nice with the people who help you sell records?

We, the soundtrack community, are not well-informed (Soundtrack Cinema and review updates do not apply here). Who else, aside from Jeron (who apparently does know everything), knew that the Chris Young website was changing hands? Who knew about The Night Stalker CD? Before I (not bragging) called Varese after the fourth or fifth delay, who knew that Wonder Boys was cancelled (or "delayed")? Who knew why the delayed it the OTHER times?

Ah, hell. I done lost my train of thought. I'm going the hell to bed. I suggest you do the same, Ford. You too, Jeron.

Fair enough! (and for the record, I have been lurking for quite a while - just never got around to posting!)

<< 1. Thank God for Ford? >>

Well, not is as many words. You might have a problem with Ford, but I don't. He's been nothing but helpful to me, and for that I am appreciative. Sure we have our different opinions - but they are just that: opinions.

<< Would you be pissed off if you found a glowing L.A. Times article about you? I don't
think so! Good with the bad, it's part of public participation. >>

Oh come on - you know what I meant (I hope)!! Of course I would LOVE it if the LA Times mentioned me in an article - I wouldn't be pissed! I'm talking about the times when on a public forum (such as Filmtracks, for example) someone starts badmouthing me and/or my website(s). And no one tells me about it. I made an error once in a review and instead of emailing me personally, someone saw fit to post the gaff to FILMUS-L, and discuss it there. This was before I was on the list, so I didn't know about it until someone told me. NOT a nice way to find out.

<< What makes a site official? Seriously, aren't they really just glorified fan sites? >>

WHAT??? Seriously you're joking. A site is Official when a composer contributes all of the information to the website. I don't think you can honestly call John Ottman's site a "glorified fan site" - just because he doesn't have the HTML and graphic skills to create the site, all of the content is his.

For example, Ryan Keaveney's Elfman site is a (very good) example of a fan site - Elfman himself has had no input. Shaiman's site, however, is officially sanctioned - but not official because Ryan comes up with a lot of the content himself, and Shaiman contributes occasionally.

All of the websites I design only contain content DIRECTLY from the composer. If that's not an "official" site, then I don't know what is.

TimT asked:
<< My problem is not getting them to work, the problem is that they aren't there, just dead links. As of whenever the last time I went there. >>

Eesh. Well, since part of what I'm doing is fixing and cleaning up, I'll see what the deal is with that. Thanks for pointing it out!!!

<< What do you mean Quick Time is safer and more secure? >>

Streaming Quicktimes through a Quicktime Server is more secure because it's like a radio show - you can't record the audio cue, so it's more "secure" and no one can download the clip to distribute.

Shaun: don't blame Ford for my coming here. He isn't "tattle-telling". I do visit these message boards occasionally, and might miss something. Ford was merely letting me know, in case I didn't see it. For that, I thank him.

wow this was a long post. :P

Only thing that pisses ME off here (that being apparently the operative phrase throughout this thread) is that SHAUN'S LINK DOESN'T WORK!

in REAL life, it's

The reason your link didn't work wasn't because you left out "http://", it was because you have a comma at the end of the URL.

:P

NP- "I Love You" - Barney and Friends

"Streaming Quicktimes through a Quicktime Server is more secure because it's like a radio show - you can't record the audio cue, so it's more "secure" and no one can download the clip to distribute."

First, recording and downloading are two very different things.

Second, it is very easy to keep .rm files from being downloaded off a server. Most people have no professional experience with RM servers and therefore have no idea how to set things up correctly.

Third, if it plays through your speakers, whether streamed or downloaded, it can be recorded. Not everyone's sound card may have this capability, but it's certainly doable, and easily.

Finally, for Shaun. I don't hate you, man, but if you don't give me that last beer sitting next to you....

Yes, you can record any audio playing out of your speakers. Yes, you can securely stream RealAudio.

But you need a RealAudio server to do that. We did, and it's a memory hog that is buggy as all hell. So we decided to go with the more stable QuickTime server.

That's all I was getting at.

And while you can record (capture) streaming audio off your speakers, would you really want to do that and burn it to a CD-R? Probably not, which is why I think it's much more secure than providing, say, full-quality MP3s for people to download.

Well, Quicktime is pretty standard worldwide. You might need a better computer. :P

> who the heck is going to save and burn a
> 30 sec soundclip? If there is actually
> someone, it's probably just one guy, and
> thats not much of a threat.

Who says that it's only 30 seconds long? Believe me - there are PLENTY of people who would burn certain audio cues that will be coming soon on the ParodiFair website.

Dan

I think TimT was referring to the Christopher Young web site regarding the 30 second sound clips. Well, 40 second sound clips, anyway.

As far as QuickTime being the worldwide standard? Thanks for the laugh! Come on, there is NO worldwide standard when it comes to secure digital music. Even the "SDMI" (the Secure Digital Music Initiative - a group originally sanctioned by the RIAA and big five) can't even come up with one, and they said they would by Christmas 1999!

Peter: I NEVER said that Quicktime was the worldwide standard for secure streaming audio. What I said was that Quicktime is pretty standard worldwide. Meaning you would be HARD PRESSED to find a computer user who does NOT have Quicktime installed on their computer.

TimT: I really don't care what other sites use; I care what web BROWSERS (i.e. people like YOU) use. And I'm willing to bet that everyone has Quicktime.

If you own a Macintosh, you have Quicktime. If you're on a PC, and installed a browser, it most likely installed Quicktime.

Dan, it doesn't seem like yer fully broken in here. Git on over to the "? for PeterK" thread and read the whole thing, no skipping. It's newbie induction time!

PeterK

I know. Nothing heated or exciting to contribute.