Categories
Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.
ALAN SILVESTRI
-
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
I think the problem is that a lot of the people who are complaining about this are people who illegally downloaded the album. Of course, that doesn't apply to everyone, and we already know from some folks that they got early copies from Colosseum. But clearly every single one of the people in America who were moaning about this are ones that downloaded the album illegally, so why should Varese care what those people think?
Is there a problem with the sound on the album? That's the question. Varese say they've checked it - and the album producer (Alan Silvestri) has checked it - and everyone's happy with it. I wonder if Colosseum mistakenly used the wrong master, but Varese in America used the right one? -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Varese quite specifically said they have not checked it.
They've just listened to it.'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
Varese quite specifically said they have not checked it.
They've just listened to it.
Sorry. I forgot how annoying audio problems can be when you can't even tell they're there by listening. -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009 edited
Have you actually read the rest of the thread?
(You'll just need to go back to page 15 for the whole story and a rebuttal against the very point I myself actually already made and you repeated here)'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
To repeat (
) the point for the terminally lazy (i.e. Southall), the horridly disinterested (i.e. Southall) and the permanently clueless (i.e. Southall):
Martijn wrote
Anyway, whether or not a lot of people delude themselves into thinking they can hear a diference (and I'm not saying there's anyone on board here who does do that!), is neither here nor there, as I'm absolutely with Erik on this one: this is a manufacturing mistake which of course should be recified.
It's simply not the product the customer paid for, no matter what expert decides whether or not someone is able to "hear the difference".'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
Have you actually read the rest of the thread?
(You'll just need to go back to page 15 for the whole story and a rebuttal against the very point I myself actually already made and you repeated here)
Of course I've read it. Complaining about something you can't even notice is the height of stupidity. (I'm not saying that you can't even notice it, I'm speaking hypothetically.)
It's not like buying a box of corn flakes and finding muesli inside - it's like buying a box of corn flakes, eating the whole box, enjoying them as you always do, but then finding out they weren't made from Uruguayan corn, they were actually made from Argentinian corn. -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009 edited
You realize of course you're not only opening the door to businesses starting to sell CDs (at premium price of course) mastered from 128 kbps sources, as tests indicate people generally can't hear the difference anyway, but also making an excellent point on why online shops should continue selling low bitrate mp3s?
Again: it's not what I *paid* for.
I expect a certain quality from CD recordings and *I am not getting it*.
Whether or not I can hear it is completely besides the point.
If a company advertising muesli from Colombia turns out to be selling muesli from Switzerland, you bet your ass I'd be unhappy about it! (I'm buying what's on the package. Not what people may consider should be good enough for me).'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
Again: it's not what I *paid* for.
I expect a certain quality from CD recordings and *I am not getting it*.
Whether or not I can hear it is completely besides the point.
It's PRECISELY the point! -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009 edited
No, it's not.
The content should match the package. That's not something I'm making up here. It's the law (at least throughout the EU).
While I don't think there may be an actual legal definition of a CD and what standards the sound on it should adhere to, it sits very ill with me that you're getting 192 kbps, while (what is generally accepted as) lossless is reasonably expected.
It's not about this particular CD or whether or not anyone can actually hear the difference with the naked ear (I don't happen to think so as I've argued time and again), it's about the discrepancy between WHAT IS OFFERED and WHAT IS DELIVERED.
And THAT's the point.'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorBregt
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
I agree with Martijn. A CD should deliver excellent sound quality, since it's a reproduction of a recording, without any altering. You don't buy a BMW/Audi because it can move in the same direction as a Renault/Citroen. You buy a BMW because you know it will definitely offer better quality, even in small details. That's what you pay for as well.Kazoo -
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
No, it's not.
The content should match the package. That's not something I'm making up here. It's the law (at least throughout the EU).
While I don't think there may be an actual legal definition of a CD and what standards the sound on it should adhere to, it sits very ill with me that you're getting 192 kbps, while (what is generally accepted as) lossless is reasonably expected.
It's not about this particular CD or whether or not anyone can actually hear the difference with the naked ear (I don't happen to think so as I've argued time and again), it's about the discrepancy between WHAT IS OFFERED and WHAT IS DELIVERED.
And THAT's the point.
I shall stop arguing just for the sake of arguing, because I fear I may not have legs to stand on.
Instead I think we should ask all those members of maintitles who have a genuine copy of the Varese (and not Colosseum) CD whether there actually is a problem or not? If Varese and Silvestri can't find it - perhaps there isn't and it's something the Germans introduced. Which was actually my original point, before you jumped in and started arguing with me about something else. -
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
(Though I do have to point out, to rescue some modicum of pride (or at least, dent yours) - in one sentence you say "it's the law (at least throughout the EU)" which is blatantly untrue, but fortunately you then realise as such by saying in your very next sentence "I don't think there may be an actual legal definition of a CD and what standards the sound on it should adhere to" - which I enjoyed.) -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Southall wrote
(Though I do have to point out, to rescue some modicum of pride (or at least, dent yours) - in one sentence you say "it's the law (at least throughout the EU)" which is blatantly untrue, but fortunately you then realise as such by saying in your very next sentence "I don't think there may be an actual legal definition of a CD and what standards the sound on it should adhere to" - which I enjoyed.)
Erm. You do realize that "It's the law (at least throughout the EU)." was applicable to the sentence right before it? "The content should match the package."
Which is most definitely true as any cursory glance at European (and indeed mist national) product law will show.
As such it would be applicable teleogically (or by "common law" in the UK).
Obviously first there would have to be a common ground as to what is expected of a CD's content, but I don't really doubt that would be a point of great discrepancy or confusion, as I'm pretty sure that everyone is on the same page on what a CD is supposed to deliver (and I can't really see any corporation lawyer arguing that really it's fine to offer low quality CDs at premium prices without damaging the music industry's credibility even more than it already is today).'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
Southall wrote
(Though I do have to point out, to rescue some modicum of pride (or at least, dent yours) - in one sentence you say "it's the law (at least throughout the EU)" which is blatantly untrue, but fortunately you then realise as such by saying in your very next sentence "I don't think there may be an actual legal definition of a CD and what standards the sound on it should adhere to" - which I enjoyed.)
Erm. You do realize that "It's the law (at least throughout the EU)." was applicable to the sentence right before it? "The content should match the package."
Which is most definitely true as any cursory glance at European (and indeed mist national) product law will show.
Can you please point out to me where on the package it says anything about not using a 192K master!? -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
As such it would be applicable teleogically (or by "common law" in the UK).
Obviously first there would have to be a common ground as to what is expected of a CD's content, but I don't really doubt that would be a point of great discrepancy or confusion, as I'm pretty sure that everyone is on the same page on what a CD is supposed to deliver (and I can't really see any corporation lawyer arguing that really it's fine to offer low quality CDs at premium prices without damaging the music industry's credibility even more than it already is today).'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorDemonStar
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009 edited
I just hope they took notice of it and will ensure it doesn't happen in the future, whatever they passed it off as this time. -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009 edited
And while we're quoting selectively:
Southall wrote
...you...a.r.e ...b.r.i.l l.i.a.n.t... - which I enjoyed.)
Thank you!
I agree.'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorDemonStar
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
-
- CommentAuthorSouthall
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
As such it would be applicable teleogically (or by "common law" in the UK).
Obviously first there would have to be a common ground as to what is expected of a CD's content, but I don't really doubt that would be a point of great discrepancy or confusion, as I'm pretty sure that everyone is on the same page on what a CD is supposed to deliver (and I can't really see any corporation lawyer arguing that really it's fine to offer low quality CDs at premium prices without damaging the music industry's credibility even more than it already is today).
You must be joking. You'd have no legal ground to stand on. There are CDs on the shelves of film themes played by "The Cosmic Orchestra" etc, which are actually a man with a cheap synthesiser. That is not my expectation of what an orchestra could reasonably be defined as, but I very much doubt I would be successful in pursuing a claim in a court of law. I own CDs which have been mastered from vinyl, complete with pops and crackles. I own CDs of music recorded in stereo the 1980s which have been mastered in mono. I own CDs which explicitly say "XYZ's complete score for..." when it is not the complete score. I own CDs which say "Original soundtrack recording" when they are in fact a re-recording. If all those things have passed through the decades without getting their record companies into trouble then I can't seriously imagine one getting into trouble because the way it mastered an album is different from my or your expectation (but not different from anything they have explicitly or even implicitly stated). -
- CommentAuthorMartijn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009 edited
Of course there is legal ground.
It's all about legal ground.
I'm sure that somewhere "The Cosmic Orchestra" is registered as a one-man band.
Those CDs remastered from old vinyl have that stated specifically somewhere in the credits (unless they're Tickertape CDs or oher Chinese, Taiwanese or Russian rip-offs and bootlegs (i.e. illegal to start with)...of which there are plenty).
And at the end of the day, the simple fact is that no one has actually taken any company to court for any perceived transgression yet (remember the stink about the "complete" Phantom Menace special issue though? The company did a VERY fast backpedal on that one and actually issued an apology because it wasn't complete).
I agree it's a largely hypothetical development as I think most companies won't make any such stupid mistakes as a matter of standard (which I still think this is rather than some huge conspiracy to brainwash us into accepting lower-but quality issues, which simply makes no sense on any level), but you can bet your bottom dollar there'll be proper regulation in the EU if this -for whatever reason- becomes widespread (and/or a lot of damage claims in the US).
All it takes is one legal precedent. One disgruntled distributor or even direct client taking them to court.
However you're happy with material in your possession that is allegedly advertised/packaged to present a completely different product than the actual content proves to be, it doesn't in any way make that practice legal.'no passion nor excitement here, despite all the notes and musicians' ~ Falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorFalkirkBairn
- CommentTimeAug 7th 2009
Martijn wrote
It's not about this particular CD or whether or not anyone can actually hear the difference with the naked ear (I don't happen to think so as I've argued time and again), it's about the discrepancy between WHAT IS OFFERED and WHAT IS DELIVERED.
I've been reading this thread today at work - and it's an interesting discussion.
My take on things would be that when you buy a CD you are buying a form of media that will provide a listening experience that - to the listener - will be a satisfactory listening experience. And if it sounds fine then it's not important if there's been a level of compression that an "expert" can differentiate.
It's how it sounds.
I'd assume that if a CD from a lossy source is ripped and compared with a CD from a non-lossy source then there would be a difference(?) But the CD wouldn't be sold to cater for people who wish to rip the CD (lossily (may not be a proper word)).The views expressed in this post are entirely my own and do not reflect the opinions of maintitles.net, or for that matter, anyone else. http://www.racksandtags.com/falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorDemetris
- CommentTimeAug 17th 2009
Ethics is the problem here, to which Martijn made some very good points that i too agree with;
Actual differences though are either very small or - like most of the times, non-detactable even with professional audio equipment, not even bothering to comment on the performance of those on cheap-to-mid-range standard home audio equipment. The problem on this side, mostly comes down to the fact that the film music medium is dominated by nerds (fans and sadly - also professionals) who think they are audio engineers - composers - musicians - conductors, all in one special package.Love Maintitles. It's full of Wanders. -
- CommentAuthorPanthera
- CommentTimeAug 20th 2009 edited
Lossless audio is the standard CD release. Releasing it with lossy audio, whether noticeable or not, is below standards for the music industry and definitely not ideal. That's the way I see it anyway. From what I've read this GI Joe problem was a mistake, but if it was intentional then I will be upset. -
- CommentAuthorFalkirkBairn
- CommentTimeSep 5th 2009
Do CD quality recordings represent the full dynamic range of a live performance? Or is there a level of compression involved?The views expressed in this post are entirely my own and do not reflect the opinions of maintitles.net, or for that matter, anyone else. http://www.racksandtags.com/falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorBobdH
- CommentTimeSep 5th 2009 edited
No, there's always a fairly big level of compression with audio CD's. Take the complete recordings of Lord of the Rings for example. What you hear on the DVD is a lot closer to the original recording, yet that would never fit on a regular CD. -
- CommentAuthorFalkirkBairn
- CommentTimeSep 7th 2009
BobdH wrote
No, there's always a fairly big level of compression with audio CD's. Take the complete recordings of Lord of the Rings for example. What you hear on the DVD is a lot closer to the original recording, yet that would never fit on a regular CD.
So are we being cheated with CDs since we're not getting the true sound form a live performance - even though we can't hear it?
See where I'm going with this?The views expressed in this post are entirely my own and do not reflect the opinions of maintitles.net, or for that matter, anyone else. http://www.racksandtags.com/falkirkbairn -
- CommentAuthorjustin boggan
- CommentTimeOct 22nd 2009 edited
Physical score-only CD* for "A Chirstmas Carol" coming; 30 second samples for all cues:
http://www.amazon.com/A-Christmas-Carol … mp;sr=1-39
Technically, there is one song at the end. And it's not Glen Ballard.
CORRECTION:
The link to the physical CD goes to some unrelated CD release. Maybe there will be no Silvestri CD, just hte shitty MP3 download.The views and opinions of Ford A. Thaxton are his own and do not necessarily reflect the ones of ANYONE else. -
- CommentAuthorLars
- CommentTimeOct 23rd 2009
justin boggan wrote
Physical score-only CD* for "A Chirstmas Carol" coming; 30 second samples for all cues:
http://www.amazon.com/A-Christmas-Carol … mp;sr=1-39
Technically, there is one song at the end. And it's not Glen Ballard.
CORRECTION:
The link to the physical CD goes to some unrelated CD release. Maybe there will be no Silvestri CD, just hte shitty MP3 download.
but i think alan silvestri is involved in this song, because the melody sounds like his theme for the movie. -
- CommentAuthorNautilus
- CommentTimeOct 23rd 2009
What a mediocre cover....
I could care less about the movie. Zemeckis was one of my favourite filmakers, but with this obsession for do this kind of films he is becomming annoying.
About the music, this could be a great Silvestri's year. Being G.I joe a guilty pleasure of mine, and a Christmar Charol a movie where he easaly will shine. -
- CommentAuthorThomas Glorieux
- CommentTimeOct 26th 2009
I hope the movie and score give me all I'm expecting to find, so I don't want to be dissapointed on this one. Silvestri remains a top notch composer and I hate to see him doing something uninspiringwaaaaaahhhhhhhh!!! Where's my nut? arrrghhhhhhh