-
Message Boards

Movie Soundtracks
Soundtrack CD Sequencing
Archive of old forum. No more postings.
Please visit our new forum, The MovieMusic Lobby, to post new topics.
Author
Topic: Soundtrack CD Sequencing

Ken S

Oscar® Winner

Recently when I did some score research on Alan Silvestri's great BACK TO THE FUTURE Trilogy, I again confronted this never-ending enigma: Why on earth do the soundtrack producers compile the soundtracks in such a CRAZY WAY ? A soundtrack album IS NOT a pop music album and the tracks should not be treated as "songs" to be mixed in whatever order - a movie score is bound to the movie narrative and should, at least in my opinion, be presented in the movie's narrative order. Otherwise it may happen just as it happened to me - after seeing recently the BTTF Trilogy on television, I put the Part III soundtrack into my player and searched desperately for the extremely beautiful finale cue - and after 10 years of owning the soundtrack CD I was amazed to find the finale in its entirety on track 8 of the 18-track CD (from Varese Sarabande), the track itself named very uninformatively "Doc Returns"...The point is that why on earth can't the producers of the soundtrack albums make their albums in the narrative order of the movie ? BTTF PART III is a very "good" example of simply horrifying sequencing, placing the dramatic rejection of Doc (by Clara) BEFORE their kiss under the starlit sky, and - as I already mentioned - the finale track gets somewhat buried amidst all the crazy sequencing in the middle of the program...
The same goes with the promo release of the original BTTF score, where some of the tracks are placed in an obnoxious order.
...And another thing is the misguiding track titles - Heavens, why can't the composers/producers name the tracks in such a way that they would actually represent the movie's narrative ?
Simply said, movie music albums need to be MOVIE MUSIC ALBUMS where one can swiftly find the favorite moments in the movie's score.
KEN
posted 05-24-2003 07:08 PM PT (US) 
dgoldwas

Oscar® Winner

quote:
Originally posted by Ken S:
The point is that why on earth can't the producers of the soundtrack albums make their albums in the narrative order of the movie?Simply enough - because sometimes it doesn't lend itself to being a good listening experience.
quote:
...And another thing is the misguiding track titles - Heavens, why can't the composers/producers name the tracks in such a way that they would actually represent the movie's narrative?Well, that really depends on what the composer/producers are going for. See Don Davis's tracks for BOUND for an example.
I'm sure that album would drive you crazy!Dan
posted 05-24-2003 07:17 PM PT (US) 
TimT

Oscar® Winner

I myself, have never listened to a soundtrack to "re-experience" the movie. Most of the soundtracks I have, I've seen the movies too even. I prefer a great listening experience of themes and a variety of emotionaly moving moments.Now I'll tell you what I don't like. I don't like when a soundtrack is put together with 30-40 tracks of really short cues. For example....Children of Dune and Moby Dick. That is not my idea of a great listening experience, each track is so short, it doesn't delevope into anything and sounds like short little soundclips of a larger work. These types of soundtracks are the ones that need the "Album" format releases, like The Dark Crystal, and The Fury.
NP- Force 10 from Navarone with a score by Ron Goodwin
posted 05-24-2003 07:44 PM PT (US) 
scoreguy16

Oscar® Winner

I'd much rather have a great listening experience then to have the music not flow and just stay in the order in which they were in the movie. Take Face/Off for example, There's 8 tracks and each track is a mix (except for Hans' Loft which is actually a shortened version of what was in the film). The tracks are completely out of order but the CD flows extremely well and a 40 minute experience seems like it only took 5 and it leaves you wanting to hear it again and again. I think the CD is beautifully mixed and it seems like a lot of effort went into it.Clayton
posted 05-24-2003 09:36 PM PT (US) 
perfpitch

Oscar® Winner

The question isn't why the disc can't have the tracks in chronological order, but why producers won't take the exceedingly minor trouble of listing them that way in the accompanying notes, so that, if we desire, we can program our players accordingly (as opposed to playing the accordion).[Message edited by perfpitch on 05-25-2003]
posted 05-25-2003 12:22 AM PT (US) 
franz_conrad

Oscar® Winner

There are some films where I'd really want a complete representation of the score (e.g. The Matrix Reloaded, The Empire Strikes Back), others where an album edited to be the perfect listening experience would be fine (Last of the Mohicans, The Scarlet Letter, The Hours, any Vangelis score), and others where I'd want both (Gladiator, The Lord of the Rings scores, The Thin Red Line, recent Star Wars scores). (And indeed there are some, rejected scores being an perfect example, where anything would be good.)And maybe this explains the producer's dilemma... they know we will probably buy anything, so maybe anything will do.
Just a thought.
NP High Road to China (Barry)
[Message edited by franz_conrad on 05-25-2003]
posted 05-25-2003 02:54 PM PT (US) 
scoreguy16

Oscar® Winner

I agree with the previous post. I love hearing a score in it's complete form, but I also love to hear what composers/producers will do with the score for it's release (if that makes sense).I will go back to my Face/Off example, how can a composer/producer tell you what order the tracks are in when they're mixed together? Would they be like "from 3:04 to 3:45, that should be track 29" or something like that?
Clayton
posted 05-25-2003 04:58 PM PT (US) 
SEBULBA

Oscar® Winner

Ya know this whole Listening experience thing? O.K. it's not a good listening experience why? Because maybe there are too many slow cues together? Too many action cues in a row? Well, let's see, what does that say about the film then? Maybe the film should be re-edited into a better visual experience. I think it's a crock. And they can't use the excuse any more of trying to get it to fit on an LP properly. I see absolutely no point in having a score released (today anyway) that's not in film chronological order. Anyone else see my point?
posted 05-27-2003 08:46 AM PT (US) 
Swashbuckler

Oscar® Winner

I tend to prefer hearing scores chronologically because I find that most film scores do have a definite arc to them. Often when I hear re-sequenced albums, I am very aware (even if I haven't seen the film) that this is from a climactic cue, while this is from earlier in the film.That said, I think there are, indeed, many albums that successfully rethink the music. Trevor Jones' The Dark Crystal and Thomas Newman's The Player are perfect examples of albums that work better than the complete scores (although I like having both available in the case of the former).
There are certain album producers who restructure their scores for their albums in a way I hate. The most prominent example of this is John Williams. While I like his re-recordings, when he releases an original soundtrack recording and shuffles the cues around and remixes them for his albums, he often removes the overall structure from the music. I have never heard a restructured John Williams score that didn't sound better chronologically presented.
posted 05-27-2003 09:25 AM PT (US) 
franz_conrad

Oscar® Winner

quote:
Originally posted by Swashbuckler:
There are certain album producers who restructure their scores for their albums in a way I hate. The most prominent example of this is John Williams. While I like his re-recordings, when he releases an original soundtrack recording and shuffles the cues around and remixes them for his albums, he often removes the overall structure from the music. I have [b]never heard a restructured John Williams score that didn't sound better chronologically presented.[/B]Not even The Phantom Menace? Disc Two of the Ultimate Edition which slavishly followed film order was an horrendous listening experience. I'm not saying there wasn't good music there (in fact one of my favorite motifs from the film, Qui-Gon Jin's, only appears on that disc), but the chronological presentation does the music no favours, particularly during the Battle of Naboo, which raised the bar on tracked film scores. (After the Battle of Geonosis in Attack of the Clones, one could, a la Joel Silver, say there no longer was a bar.)
TPM and AOTC would also be effective rebuttals against an earlier poster who suggested films be re-edited to make a better visual experience. It sounds like a pretty dubious idea in the first place, but George Lucas has already demonstrated that not only does it fail to lift the film, it often takes a fine score down with it, when the original score is tracked over the new action.
NP Glassworks (Glass)
posted 05-27-2003 02:26 PM PT (US) 
scoreguy16

Oscar® Winner

So SEBULBA, you think the film should be edited so that the score CD flows better? Just cuz there may be slow music in a movie, that doesn't mean the film itself is slow.Clayton
posted 05-27-2003 03:03 PM PT (US) 
SEBULBA

Oscar® Winner

No I'm not saying a movie should be re-edited. I'm just making a point that often times a soundtrack is released as a better listening experience by mixing the music between it's quite cues, action cues, etc. Rather than have numerous action cues (or whatever) in a row. I'm just pointing out that does that mean it's not good or boring if it's in chronological order as the film? Does that mean the film is boring then if the music follows? There are of course always exceptions, but I definately prefer chronological. It's easier to release it chronological and let people use "Random" on their machines if they want than for someone to figure out the order and program their machine. That's just my opinion. Everyone clear now?
posted 05-28-2003 08:41 AM PT (US) 
Al

Oscar® Winner

I understand, Sebulba, and in a way, I agree. If a film has a well-structured, interesting flow to it, this should be apparent in a chronologically-presented score.However, stories written for the cinema today can be somewhat radical in their structure, which the scores must adapt to, and if they do so successfully, then perhaps it is the listener who should adapt as well?
NP: Goldsmith's "Psycho II"
posted 05-28-2003 10:54 AM PT (US) Old Infopop Software by UBB
