It’s Christmas! 🙂 For that reason, I’m bringing Harry Potter back. With further improved sound and refined cover sets. While I always liked what I did for ‘Philosopher’s Stone’ I was never fully happy with it. Not even with the version I re-shared 2013 (text for that can still be found below). I always thought that the sound was a bit hollow and not as crisp as the frequency response indicated. To my surprise I also discovered that my Deluxe Edition for the first Potter was pretty bass-light. I subsequently remembered that I did have problems with the right amount of bass. Well, it seems I wasn’t able to do this 6 years ago – but now I am. All of this is corrected for the newest version I therefore dubbed 1.5. It’s a bit more lush than the versions before with slightly improved stageing. To be perfectly straight, I’m still not entirely happy with it. To reduce the difference between loud and soft parts I used automated dynamic compression. If done right, you won’t hear it but this Edition sadly is one of those examples where you can if you know what to listen for (slightly fluctuating noise levels, for instance). In order to get rid of it, I would need to do it again. On the other hand, people seem to love it. This truly is one of my most successful Deluxe Editions, only Jurassic Park and TRON:Legacy received more views than this one. I also have to mention that this and the Deluxe Edition for ‘Chamber Of Secrets’ brought me official mastering jobs. While I don’t really understand it (I did superior sounding Deluxe Editions) I also don’t want to treat peoples’ opinions with disrespect. As a – sort of – funny aside: some bootleg label pressed the contents of my set on CD (included in a box-set containing expanded scores for all Harry-Potter-movies). I don’t support this, though. I’m not making money from my set so I’ll throw them some shade because in their case I’m quite sure the composer isn’t either.
But not only the sound was updated, I also updated/re-did the covers. I always loved the faux-leather cover (taken from a box-set containing all movies). But as time passed, I more and more hated what I did with it. The Deluxe Edition banner didn’t fit, the Trajan font was placed horribly, etc. I corrected this for the new set (and also created a background template so that I can use this particular cover for other Potter-movies, Prisoner of Azkaban for instance (anyone, pretty please?)). For all the other covers I’ve replaced the fonts (it’s Felix Titling now) and the symbols I use. I even did two new covers (though I don’t think they’re that good).
So, enjoy it. I do 🙂
P.S.: I also merged "The Chess Game" with "Checkmate". For years I wondered how I could have been so stupid NOT to merge them. Well, I did it now and it’s a lot better indeed.
Old text:
It�s back!! Yes, you are seeing correctly, after almost two years my original version of ‘The Philosopher’s Stone’ is back. After I did ‘The Chamber of Secrets’ yesterday (grab it here) (http://forums.ffshrine.org/f92/harry-potter-chamber-secrets-deluxe-edition-john-129480/#post2304029) a few people asked me if I could re-share this Deluxe Edition. Thing is I already thought about re-sharing it and while I was working on ‘Chamber of Secrets’ I collected additional pictures for updated covers and also investigated several sonic improvements I might be able to achieve. But then at the last seconds I scrapped the idea because I wasn�t in the mood. Well, it was all in vain since people have been asking for it constantly so here it is.
I remastered the sound further, soft parts have a slightly improved audibility while they have more resolution at the same time. The whole sound is less-in-your-face compared to the original version I shared almost two years ago. So if you don�t like a too aggressive sound then this version is for you. And don�t worry, it still offers the same crispness and golden sheen as before. It won�t sound as well as ‘The Chamber of Secrets’ however, to achieve that I would have to do this Edition anew.
The cover has been updated as well, I corrected some errors, improved readability should it be printed and – YAY! – I also added two covers for the discs themselves. I forgot last time and now this error has been corrected.
Tracklist:
Disc 1
1. Prologue 4:25
2. Visit to the Zoo 2:57
3. Letters from Hogwarts 3:39
4. Hagrid�s Arrival 1:20
5. You�re a Wizard, Harry! 3:16
6. Diagon Alley 4:36
7. Mr. Ollivander�s Wand Shop 2:03
8. Dark Times (Hagrid�s Flashback) 2:50
9. Platform 9� 2:38
10. Chocolate Frogs 0:48
11. Arrival at Hogwarts & The Great Hall 3:58
12. The Sorting Hat 3:26
13. The Banquet 3:39
14. Lonely first Night 1:04
15. Mail Drop & Broom Lesson 5:01
16. Moving Stairs & Third Floor 2:29
17. Introducing Quidditch & The Feather 2:03
18. Fighting the Troll 3:58
19. Quidditch! 9:37
20. Cast a Christmas Spell 2:08
21. Christmas Morning & The Mirror of Erised 10:41
Disc 2
1. Light Reading 1:06
2. Norwegian Ridgeback 1:36
3. Filch Remembers 1:29
4. The dark Forest 5:12
5. Running to McGonagall 2:11
6. Fluffy�s Harp 2:22
7. The Devil�s Snare & Flying Keys 4:12
8. The Chess Game & Checkmate 7:22
9. The Face of Lord Voldemort 6:06
10. Love, Harry 1:41
11. Leaving Hogwarts 4:45
12. End Credits 5:32
13. Warner Brothers Logo (Alternate) 0:17
14. Lonely first Night (Alternate) 1:05
15. Hedwig�s Theme (Alternate Suite) 2:09
16. The Leaky Cauldron (Source) 1:08
17. Christmas Music Box (Unused) 1:08
18. Hagrid plays the Flute (Source) 0:40
19. Hedwig�s Theme (Album Suite) 5:02
20. Theme Suite 16:43
21. Coca Cola Advert 1:01
22. … Things to come 4:38
Links FLAC:
https://www.mirrorcreator.com/files/BVVHII5H/PhilosophizingSorcerer.part1.rar_links
https://www.mirrorcreator.com/files/0VJ65C1A/PhilosophizingSorcerer.part2.rar_links
Link MP3:
https://www.mirrorcreator.com/files/1YWEWPYY/SorcerizingPhilosopher.rar_links
Password for both: HoggyHoggyHogwarts
Enjoy!!
Actually… if you�re all interested… I modeled the sound not on "Jurassic Park" or "Hook" but on "Star Wars: Attack of the Clones": it was recorded at the same venue (Abbey Road) with the same orchestra, choir and recording engineer and it�s one of the best sounding CDs ever released. And to my surprise that sound could be adapted to "The Philosopher’s Stone" completely. This may sound arrogant… but it really sounds gorgeous now. It is very seldom that I�m so happy with a "remastering" of mine.
But really, the most work was the editing, deciding which takes to keep (had to watch the movie partly), mixing them together where it fitted (I hate many tracks) and re-ordering them and finally writing the tracklist in Photoshop.
Question: You have the alternate for "Lonely First Night" on disc two but in all I’ve seen leaked, the alternate and the original were the same recording… not even a different take but the same. Did you by chance come across something different or was this just based on the boot?
Question: You have the alternate for "Lonely First Night" on disc two but in all I’ve seen leaked, the alternate and the original were the same recording… not even a different take but the same. Did you by chance come across something different or was this just based on the boot?
Yes, the sound was brightened up. Even if it had inherent clarity already this could be boosted without ill effect (that�s why I was so surprised) to the same level of, say, Jurassic Park, Hook or SW:AOTC. But I didn�t do only that, I also tweaked the fundamental frequencies (above the bass) because Abbey Road usually has a balanced fundamental area on recordings, on the recording sessions it was muted a bit. It�s funny that you ask because now the overall frequency response is perfectly balanced out and follows the -6dB guide closely.
And to my knowledge (if I�ve heard it correctly) the alternate version of "Lonely First Night" is slightly different in the beginning. I simply included because it said so on the recording sessions and because I was under the impression that it�s slightly different in the beginning. If it isn�t alternate at all, well, just delete it.
It’s very nice. Do you plan to release A Chamber of Secrets remastered?
No, I don�t. I haven�t found any expanded version without sound effects yet and it wouldn�t make much sense to remaster the existing version because most people do not care that much about sound quality. I have "remastered" it for myself of course but I won�t release it.
Thanks for your great work, I’d love to hear more from you! (Hint, hint. ;))
No, it doesn�t have all the alternates. Even more, they were not alternates, they were just different takes of the same pieces with only small differences. And I always aim at a good listening experience so I used the takes that were used in the movie and discarded the other takes of the same piece. One can listen to my editions in one go without having to listen to some tracks five times in a row, doesn�t make much sense musically.
As always, you have done a fantastic job on the quality of these recordings, Sonic!
AND… of the four different covers, everyone that I have questioned, in my household, and in my office, LOVES the upper right hand corner, with the Hogwarts castle, which is the one that I had selected first off as well. Would have liked to have large, high res copies of those covers, as well as the back. But beggers cannot be…. you know…:)
Thanks.
William
As always, you have done a fantastic job on the quality of these recordings, Sonic!
AND… of the four different covers, everyone that I have questioned, in my household, and in my office, LOVES the upper right hand corner, with the Hogwarts castle, which is the one that I had selected first off as well. Would have liked to have large, high res copies of those covers, as well as the back. But beggers cannot be…. you know…:)
Thanks.
William
Exactly like me! Several examples of the same track destroy the flow for me completely. Therefore I always eliminate redundant tracks. That isn�t for completists but for me it�s about the music and with a composer of the status of John Williams a complete score most of the time is a complete work standing on its own that flows better without interruptions. I just think that erasing redundancy is more respectful to something like this.
But what do you mean with the covers? I mean I love that you like them, Bill… but they are in relative high resolution. The front cover alone is in 2850X1450 px and the inlay and the backcover are the same. I wouldn�t do any less (my working version in Photoshop is even bigger). If you want to print it out you can do so and won�t see any faults with it. You�d find it in the folder "Covers" inside the archive.
No, it doesn�t have all the alternates. Even more, they were not alternates, they were just different takes of the same pieces with only small differences. And I always aim at a good listening experience so I used the takes that were used in the movie and discarded the other takes of the same piece. One can listen to my editions in one go without having to listen to some tracks five times in a row, doesn�t make much sense musically.
But you have made mistakes, like choosing a "broken" take instead of the "perfect" take for the "alternate" Star Trek The Motion Picture Main Title in its respective score.
Ah, that may be. But I wouldn�t think that this mistake is so severe that one cannot listen to it. Furthermore, a mistake like replacing a "perfect" take with an alternate, not so perfect take like the Main Title is severe. But I doubt that my mistake on Harry Potter would THAT severe. What is the mistake btw?
Now I get it. I thought we were talking about HP.
First of all: what does have Star Trek to do with Harry Potter?
Second: the Main Title I chose came closer to the version we all know in terms of orchestral timing, precision. That�s why I used it. Who cares if there is a dropout? Is it a dropout really? Because I thought I repaired most of them…
I thought about it… but my ideas weren�t that good and I wasn�t in the mood…
Well I hear flanging, where the right channels seems to go silent/warp/decrease in volume.
Schindler’s List is already on my HDD ready to be "remastered". But it won�t be remastered that strong because it already sounds very very good. And an expanded version doesn�t make that much sense since the official score is almost complete. But I�lld do it some time in the future…
I�d rather be interested in "Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull" or "Harry Potter & The Chamber of Secrets" – both suffer from being incomplete. That ones I�d do first if someone was so kind to offer me the existing recording sessions 😉
Well I hear flanging, where the right channels seems to go silent/warp/decrease in volume.
Indeed, there are dropouts in the two channels (predominantly in the right ) at app. 0:38-0:40. But this is a technical flaw (I obviously missed) which has nothing to do with the musical quality… and I thought we were talking about musically preferred takes.
Could you "remaster" the 1975 Jaws OST that had the "concert" arrangments?
No, I couldn�t. The sound cannot be improved THAT considerably so that a "remastered" re-release would be justified. Believe me, I tried. The sonical best version would be the re-recording from Joel McNeely. It�s not the original but sounds the best.
Hell, why not remaster everything.
Because some things shouldn�t be remastered or are good enough. Furthermore I myself don�t do a "remaster". A remaster is when someone creates a new master from the original mastertape or the original master-recording where the new master is intended for wide release. I only "improve" the sound. And "improve" in my case means nothing more then fitting the sound to my taste. It helps that I have taste (most people doing "complete" scores have no idea about sound at all, you wouldn�t believe how many fucked-up, so called complete scores I�ve heard where people used crappy programs, de-noisers, cranked up the volume and created distortions, awful equalizers… etc… well, even with those crap something decent can be done if one has a little experience)
Anyway… I merely tweak the sound to my liking and on the way correct some errors that may have been overseen during the initial production. Newer scores in general have fewer problems (but suffer from the Loudness War) and older scores have more noise and analogue errors. But most filmscores are produced relatively fast and although the people working on them are highly experienced and professional errors can still be there. These "errors" are most of the time so tiny that 99% of the people never hear them but I do and so I have to get rid of them in order of being able to enjoy the music.
So, yes… most of the time I end up tweaking the sound to my liking. A few examples of scores that sound immaculately perfect are "Night Crossing", "Avatar", "Titanic" the Star Wars prequel scores, "Lady in the Water", the Indiana Jones scores (although I�m not sure about the last one) "Schindler`s List" and "Road to Perdition"… only to name a few.
Exactly! Sometimes I end up correcting mistakes other people produced by making it "better". I always aim to make my ear happy and at the same time to create a version that protects the original intent of the composer/engineer/producer/whoever. I can give an example: there is a complete version out there for "Air Force One": the additional tracks are sounding so different to the official ones in their overall frequency response, are distorted and much louder… this could have been spotted easily before producing the CD… but no, it wasn�t spotted so that in the end I have to work on it. Or take the "Mulan" boot: stereo separation is way off. In both cases Bruce Botnicks’ sonic vision was ignored – and by that in turn also Goldsmiths’ vision of how it should sound. How respectful is that?
Is the mcneely the original film tracks rerecorded or the OST arrangments re-recorded, or both?
To my knowledge it�s the original score re-recorded, not the album suites. Read all about it here: Filmtracks: Jaws (John Williams) (http://filmtracks.com/titles/jaws.html)
This sounds spectacular! The only thing I could possibly nitpick is that some of the cues are harder to find when edited together.
Regardless, this has become my go-to copy of Philosopher’s Stone.
If only the sessions for the other films were out there…
Indeed, I made my way through that too for years, tweaking these boots most of the time with only graphic equalization (edit: only shaping by 0,3db to0.9db max from a frequency to another) + tweaking a bunch of official albums for myself. I have very good ears and despite the results used to sound better (not only to me) I knew I there was some limits I couldn’t get, simply because: it’s a craft. I’ve learned better since then, but I’m still limited. But most of all: I have never posted my tons of tweaked CD’s anywhere ! And the very few I posted was always a chance to learn, if not on technical at least on humility (we always have to learn about).
… And that’s the main problem on the web, and on these forums: it’s all about humility. It just reminds me a conversation I had with a guy on this forum when I saw his guide (Thread 84885). This guy wouldn’t want to learn from nobody. But don’t worry SonicAdventure !… Film music is well preserved by specialists !
I don’t know better than Audacity myself for final editing and for working high res but I’m sick when reading this.
May I ask: I have no idea how you can fuck up stereo separation: what kind of process will make that happen ? Always wondered.
… And that’s the main problem on the web, and on these forums: it’s all about humility. It just reminds me a conversation I had with a guy on this forum when I saw his guide (Thread 84885). This guy wouldn’t want to learn from nobody. But don’t worry SonicAdventure !… Film music is well preserved by specialists !
I don’t know better than Audacity myself for final editing and for working high res but I’m sick when reading this.
May I ask: I have no idea how you can fuck up stereo separation: what kind of process will make that happen ? Always wondered.
I did too. I started back in 1994 with Sound Forge 4.0 and its internal plugins. Back all those years ago most better plugins, EQs and such were hardware-based or available only for Macs. That has changed since, now it�s the other way round: things for IBM-PC are more compatible and more flexible though hardware based signal processors are still more flexible and more expansive. Anyway, I just realized that I�m doing this for 16 years now. And I�m still learning: just a few months ago I learned about the influence of microphones and how they are used for their particular sound (I just never thought about it before; stupid of me). And I did the same as you: I don�t post my things anywhere. The reason isn�t the sound, it�s simply not needed if it�s not expanded. People are not interested that much in sound and sometimes my version doesn�t sound that different to merit a release.
Stereo seperation on the "Mulan" boot was too wide, which means that the stereo intensity is widened. I�ll describe how it�s done: one part of the left channel is inverted by 180� and mixed into the right channel, the same happens with a part of the right channel. It doesn�t really widen the stereofield, it�s nothing more than a psychoacoustic processor that fakes a wider field. Furthermore on "Mulan" everything in the middle sounded low, as if there were a hole in the image. The person who used it clearly did it because it sounds good (wide, like surround) on the first listen – but when one listens longer it will be apparent that the room response is wrong, instruments are placed wrong, the synth in the middle suddenlys plays on every side. In any case, when someone uses this effect he destroys the signal and the mix, much the same as one would do when using resampler, de-noiser, equalizers etc. etc. With these things one destroys the original sound. They still will sound good or measure still well when they don�t create too much distortions (noise, phase skewing etc.) but in some cases create quantization noise, aliasing errors or even distortions. When I use those things I don�t "repair" anything – I just hide it well (my "Star Trek" version for example now is destroyed beyond belief because I processed it to hell and back – it does "sound" better but the purity of the signal is destroyed. Well, the signal was already destroyed so it doesn�t matter). On "Mulan" I had to "fake" the original separation back to normal, orienting myself with help of my original CD and graphic help (iZotope Ozone can be very helpful).
Sometimes though I hate preserving the original sound, especially on older recordings. There are recordings that can be tweaked to a sonic quality we are accustomed to nowadays, not what was standard back in the ’60s. For example: on "Logan’s Run" which was remastered extremely well you still could obviously hear that it was mastered for vinyl which means: lots of activity around 10 kHz and 100 Hz (vinyl couldn�t handle much more). For CD I�d have said "fuck the original intention" and mastered it to fit the capabilities of the CD. The thing is: everything I needed to create a "today’s sound" was there! And they didn�t use it! They could have created a really balanced sound experience but instead used the overall sonic response that was created to sound good on vinyl but sounds like shit on CD. Or take "Supergirl": the 1994 release sound awful: metallic, hollow, cold, aggressive. On some tracks stereo separation is wrong, the equalizing bad etc. And it WAS indeed equalized during remastering because it�s so different to the original Varese-CD; the guy responsible used a sound system called B.A.S.E (never heard of it again) but exaggerated on the way. Normally he�s mastering Rock or Punk – and you hire someone like him for an orchestral score that was engineered by legendary Eric Tomlinson (who also has his share of fucked up recordings)? Everything was wrong with that release, thankfully I could correct everything back so that it sound natural.
But so you see, even some official recordings have flaws; by all means this still is a business where "quick and dirty" sometimes is the only option (sometimes it includes also "should be cheap as possible"). One can write books about issues on recordings. Sometimes people pay too much respect to the original engineer/recording or sometimes they don�t pay any respect. And sometimes people won�t like what they are hearing: take "Poltergeist" for example: for years people have hated the sound of the 1997 Rhino edition (which was of course mastered perfectly, no flaw there) but on the 2010 FSM edition they praised the sound: "Oh, it sounds much more like my vinyl" – and indeed it did: they changed the sound to fit a vinyl record so that people won�t complain and be happy. Stupid, because it sounded perfect in the beginning.
———- Post added at 10:56 PM ———- Previous post was at 10:52 PM ———-
It’s possible to have the MP3 version ?? pleeease
I�m sorry but now you�ll be the recipient: I will never ever do an MP3 version! Never!
What is it with this question anyway? Just fire up google and ask for how to make mp3 – Google-Suche (http://www.google.de/search?q=how+to+make+mp3)
I thought stereo widening used complementary EQs on the separate channel. I hate that anyway: the bass are damaged with the one I tried. Also, I have the feeling wider stereo brings lower dynamic range (like if it spreads it).
Like you I hate cold harshy recordings and indeed, too bad most people aren’t interested with sound improvement. True too that sometimes very few is needed to be tweaked, so few that most people won’t notice it while it’s much more comfortable. The last recordings I touched were Elfman’s Batman 89, from the LaLa-Land Archival edition wich contains only Eric Tomlinson mixes on CD1 (I didn’t touched the album mixes by Shawn Murphy from CD2); and this was mostly because I thought the sound was too strong (highs), brilliant and cold. When I made my brother compare the two versions, playing the original after my tweaked version, he shouted: "we don’t hear a damn thing !". I have thought about posting it around, however it’s been made in 16-Bit and if you say the source is already great, I’d say yes. Would love to have an input as yours though, maybe with a comparison track from me, by any luck.
Also, agreeing about the vinyl thing. The only amazing thing to me is the dynamic range some vinyl transfer can reach on CD. Once you pay more attention or put your headphones on, that’s another story. However depending on the style of music, I may chose vinyl transfers for listening (non orchestral music most of the time).
PS: And yes, to me, too much official releases have flaws. It’s enough to compare with promos and recording sessions of the same music, not mentionning the loudness war factor. Btw, you spoke about the Indy scores being/sounding perfect. I wouldn’t agree so much if we’re talking about the Concord versions. Not only I found TOD too loud, for instance, but it also has a couple of wrong pitched tracks (as Raiders). I prefer the original ost of Temple Of Doom, despite the whole sound being a bit sterile of the original recording (poor potential for re-eqs).
I thought stereo widening used complementary EQs on the separate channel. I hate that anyway: the bass are damaged with the one I tried. Also, I have the feeling wider stereo brings lower dynamic range (like if it spreads it).
Like you I hate cold harshy recordings and indeed, too bad most people aren’t interested with sound improvement. True too that sometimes very few is needed to be tweaked, so few that most people won’t notice it while it’s much more comfortable. The last recordings I touched were Elfman’s Batman 89, from the LaLa-Land Archival edition wich contains only Eric Tomlinson mixes on CD1 (I didn’t touched the album mixes by Shawn Murphy from CD2); and this was mostly because I thought the sound was too strong (highs), brilliant and cold. When I made my brother compare the two versions, playing the original after my tweaked version, he shouted: "we don’t hear a damn thing !". I have thought about posting it around, however it’s been made in 16-Bit and if you say the source is already great, I’d say yes. Would love to have an input as yours though, maybe with a comparison track from me, by any luck.
Also, agreeing about the vinyl thing. The only amazing thing to me is the dynamic range some vinyl transfer can reach on CD. Once you pay more attention or put your headphones on, that’s another story. However depending on the style of music, I may chose vinyl transfers for listening (non orchestral music most of the time).
PS: And yes, to me, too much official releases have flaws. It’s enough to compare with promos and recording sessions of the same music, not mentionning the loudness war factor. Btw, you spoke about the Indy scores being/sounding perfect. I wouldn’t agree so much if we’re talking about the Concord versions. Not only I found TOD too loud, for instance, but it also has a couple of wrong pitched tracks (as Raiders). I prefer the original ost of Temple Of Doom, despite the whole sound being a bit sterile of the original recording (poor potential for re-eqs).
No shame in using what you have, so continue with your efforts. Since you don�t release the stuff you improve you can do whatever you want with it. You are your own critic and don�t have to fear anyone else. In my eyes that�s a bliss because you don�t have the desire to stand in the center of attention like I do. What I�m doing is a bit more risky (and all the "Thank-you�s" boast my ego since I never believe my "work" is any good): the RIAA may get on my back (I re-release some stuff made by others, I don�t pay their rights, I don�t take money for it etc.), people may hate it, I myself could hate it (I once did "Star Trek VI" and I hated every minute of doing it, it was a pain in the ass, the same with "STTMP" – on both I was on the brink of deleting it because I�m never completely happy with myself).
Stereowidening: the effect of being less dynamic actually is fake and depends a lot on the equipment you use (how it presents a stereo field). The dynamic will be the same (if one ignores combfilter effects) but it may appear to be different when listening to it.
Funny, that you mention Batman. Danny Elfman never was happy with the album mixes by Shawn Murphy (and he�s a brilliant guy) but to my ear they sound good; maybe a bit thin but that is probably my personal preference. The mixes by Eric Tomlinson are sounding horrible – this is one of the cases where he did an awful job. With him I�m always under the impression that his sound is a hit-and-miss job: sometimes it�s gorgeous (as on "Night Crossing") and sometimes it�s awful (as on "Batman"). But apparently they had to use substandard sources so maybe the sound is faulty because of that. I didn�t buy it, I didn�t download it and I won�t listen to it (but I�ve heard it because a friend of mine owns it). BTW, the album mixes were remastered in the truest sense: they just digitized the old album master with new technology – that�s it. I couldn�t find any important frequency differences (though the old album from 1989 has deepest bass and highest highs decreased but at areas where it�s highly unlikely that it can be heard consciously).
And vinly… I could tell a lot about vinyl. Personally, I hate vinyl. An orchestra on vinyl is a pain in the ass because I want to hear the music and not distortions, noise and pops and clicks (and they happen even with my perfectly configured turntable).
The Concorde versions of the Indy scores: I find them much better than their previous versions, especially the first one mastered by Steve Hoffman in 1995 for DCC. That one was run through tube equipment which adds distortions that may sound pleasing to some persons but in reality the distortions destroy the sound. The Concorde remaster stayed true to the original sound. Yes, they used a slight dynamic compression and they made it a bit louder than what is good for the score. But in this case the limited dynamic helps the music to flow better IMO. Furthermore, the stereo separation wasn�t very good on the DCC release, it sounds more direct because the stereo field is smaller than usual which gives the impression that the Concorde release sounds like it has more reverb. Oh, it also sounds more reverbed because of the decreased dynamic, reverb tails are getting louder when the music is a bit compressed. But on the whole they did a pretty good job because they aimed to match the sound of all three Indy scores to Indy 4. I would have tried the same and apparently the original sources were good enough so that that could be achieved.
And when it comes to Temple of Doom… I gladly threw away (no, not really, I sold it) my copy of the original OST because in my opinion it always sounded horrible sterile, harsh and cold. And I had the feeling it was because of early digital equipment (cannot be sure about that though). The Concorde remaster sounds much more pleasing and allows me to enjoy the music more.
IMO the Concorde releases are really underrated when it comes to sound. There are flaws, yes, but on the whole I think they did a pretty good job. I for one love them.
Yeah, vinyl, I know. But Portishead or Megadeth on vinyl are a blast lol.
I think your view on the Indy scores is good. I can’t naturally stand the DCC release, maybe that’s just me. Those trumpets are awful. If you want, there’s a link on those forums wich gives the Concord prototype for "Raiders" if you don’t have it yet. Sounds somehow loud (or rather heavy) but not processed with compression + has accurate pitch/speed all the long (+ one bonus track).
Yeah, vinyl, I know. But Portishead or Megadeth on vinyl are a blast lol.
I think your view on the Indy scores is good. I can’t naturally stand the DCC release, maybe that’s just me. Those trumpets are awful. If you want, there’s a link on those forums wich gives the Concord prototype for "Raiders" if you don’t have it yet. Sounds somehow loud (or rather heavy) but not processed with compression + has accurate pitch/speed all the long (+ one bonus track).
I agree, Portishead, Megadeth or any clubsounds or old rock�n roll are good on vinyl. With them vinyl can colour their sound to be subjectively better – and on those I sometimes like the colourization.
I cannot stand the DCC release too. Due to the used tube-equipment the brass gets harsh and biting. But we are fighting against windmills here because most people think the world of Steve Hoffman.
Well, I think I begin to understand my limits better now. Each one’s comprehension comes from his own knowledge, so I relate most of the problems I spot to a matter of equalization and volumes only (wich won’t correct bad mixings I can spot too, of course)… So if it’s often better for listening experience, it’s not forcedly "improved". I knew that but I understand better now. I understand you have better knowledge for analysis, but I wonder where the hell you get all the complementary "documentation" to know what’s been done to a recording (don’t feel forced to reply, I’m just thinking out loud).
Yeah, beeing involved in such sound works can boast ego pretty much, I experienced that with one of my works somehow. At least it has the virtue to rise awareness about yourself and at a certain point to give you a chance to sweep your illusions away, wich is a great chance in the end. There are strong people, and there are weak people who will grab any chance to place themselves above others because they need it, notably when they don’t have a real life (the web of illusions!). Time to chose your side, but it’s obvious to me you already did, even if you feel a bump from time to time. That keeps you being watchful ;-).
Now, about this RIAA thing I don’t thing they’ll make the difference between your edits and another. As we said the industry doesn’t look for quality, but for fast & cheap. Funny, but I had the same feeling toward the work I was proud of (the one I told you by pm)… I know think that question – not to say that fear – was related to my ego and the fake "importance" I gave to that work, as good as it still is to me despite its lacks. Truth is that it is rarely mentionned and pretty hard to find, and that’s more than alright.
Then I think you have the chance to be very well protected by these thousands of fan edits we’re ranting about. Convenient!
Yeah, beeing involved in such sound works can boast ego pretty much, I experienced that with one of my works somehow. At least it has the virtue to rise awareness about yourself and at a certain point to give you a chance to sweep your illusions away, wich is a great chance in the end. There are strong people, and there are weak people who will grab any chance to place themselves above others because they need it, notably when they don’t have a real life (the web of illusions!). Time to chose your side, but it’s obvious to me you already did, even if you feel a bump from time to time. That keeps you being watchful ;-).
Now, about this RIAA thing I don’t thing they’ll make the difference between your edits and another. As we said the industry doesn’t look for quality, but for fast & cheap. Funny, but I had the same feeling toward the work I was proud of (the one I told you by pm)… I know think that question – not to say that fear – was related to my ego and the fake "importance" I gave to that work, as good as it still is to me despite its lacks. Truth is that it is rarely mentionned and pretty hard to find, and that’s more than alright.
Then I think you have the chance to be very well protected by these thousands of fan edits we’re ranting about. Convenient!
There is an EQ out there that can correct frequencies seperate for the stereo sides or the monaural signal. But it has the disadvantage that it garbels the stereo width in the areas you change. In general it�s impossible to fix bad mixes but fortunately most of the time these don�t exist. And I�m answering your loud thoughts about where I get my background information: from other forums, booklets and general information about certain engineers. No secret really, one only has to search for it. Remember it took me some years to gain this knowledge. And I wouldn�t even call it knowledge because it�s only my curiousness.
About the ego: normally I don�t need my ego busted but sometimes I do. That�s when I release something like this. To get many "Thank you"s is indeed pleasing to me but I still always hope that they are honest since I�m always doubtful of my own releases and their qualities. Sometimes I�m a bit envious of people who are creating releases out of DVD/BluRay channels… you already posted a link to a guy who does these and who appears quite knowledgeble (though, as you said, refuses suggestions). I�m envious when they are sounding good and natural – thankfully that happens extremely rarely so that in the end I�m not envious. Most of the time I hate everything coming from the channels on DVDs or BluRays because it still sounds like crap, despite the often gigantic and painstaking efforts to hide sound effects or speech. I tried this once but was extremely ennerved because it still sounded like, well, like coming from DVD: processed, crappily mixed and equalized, with noises like wind (wind or rain is a broadband noise which cannot be removed even with spectral editing), awful jumps in volume and horrible dynamic. Therefore I have it easier than those people because I only take Recording Sessions as a starting point. So compared to them I go the easier way to boost my ego. It also because I�m also doing other things: I have a life outside of scores, the Web and forums like these. I�m a geek of course (who wouldn�t be with this hobby?) but not your typical one – I�m in a relationship and I love to go out, have fun with heavy partying (including dancing in clubs). I also enjoy reading books, watch movies, drive around with a bike or going shopping. Scores are just one of my hobbies, admittedly it�s one of the biggest and the one that has been lasting for the longest time now. Sometimes I need my virtual bumps but the thing is that they are still virtual and not "real".
And about the RIAA… well, I have two problems:
1. the original mastering engineer or the composer probably hate me. Very understandable since my "work" is a slap into their faces. They are experienced and I�m only self taught and I still display an arrogance of thinking I can do better! If I would be them I�d want to kill me in an instant… boasting an imagined "experience"… which must look to them like a fly would look to an elephant – tiny. I mean, they are trained and I�m not. And being trained means a lot to me despite my little hobby.
2. I fear that the RIAA, the copyright holders or anyone else involved with these things also hate me since I "steal" away some of their profits. People may experience my versions as the better sounding, more complete, better designed, whatever version compared to the official versions so that these people won�t buy the original ones: profit decreased -> extremely bad! They may not care about quality but they still do care about the money I may deprive them from. Well, we still have an advantage: the score industry is comparatively small to other music genres and really not important when viewed from a purely business point (there are exceptions of course but they are rare). A part of what we do works like free advertising, this is at least what it did to me. In the past five years I bought almost anything I downloaded. I downloaded it because I didn�t have it myself (it for example wasn�t available back then) and a few years later it gets re-released again. What am I doing? I�m buying it. I discovered new composers by downloading and then I wanted to own their scores myself. What am I doing? I�m buying them. If "Harry Potter & The Philospher’s Stone" would be re-released expanded officially I�d buy it without thinking. That�s how I always have done it. And I�m always hoping that some people are like me.
So much for today… 🙂
"Christmas Music Box" is not unused though, as a few seconds of it appears in the movie, while Harry and Ron plays wizard chess.
It’s in .rar format, which is always fine and when I got to extract the audio files, it says "No files to extract".
Idk if there’s some other way to get it. It seems I’m the only one with this problem with kind of throws me off. lol
Sorry I’m new, where exactly do I put the password? It doesn’t ask for one. ^^’
Oh wow! I’ve been here, but I didn’t notice. xD Thanks![COLOR="Silver"]
Sorry I’m new, where exactly do I put the password? It doesn’t ask for one. ^^’
Depends on what program you’re using, obviously I don’t know which it is.
I have a Mac too, I use UnRarX [it’s the same, right?]! 🙂 Open the program and click on ‘Password’ in the right corner. Then type "Hogwarts" and click "OK". Don’t close the program, but then double-click on the .rar file and it should open the file. 🙂
PS. And yeah I think that’s the same program I have.
Sometimes we can / and have to be proud, notably when sharing some significant efforts about our passions. Yes, you are demanding toward yourself first, and now you want to be understood what makes you demanding toward the listeners too wishing they’ll give all their thoughts on the work done. I think it’s how you experience your ego in that case. I fully understand that, and that’s always a fair pleasure indeed on some serious edit and sound work when someone pops in and is able to spot every little things you did, and to understand every choice you made. 100% positive feedbacks is nice, but not always helping. It’s often the tougher comments that will help, and unfortunately on most forums like this one everyone has to keep cute and kind, not to hurt any one with critiscism… which doesn’t help at all in the end. I know.
I have downloaded your stuff out of curiosity but I can’t listen too much music from that composer, in particular recent scores. True that the sound reminded me right away "Attack Of The Clones" (and would have, even if you wouldn’t have mentioned it) wich I haven’t heard since 5 years perhaps. That was for me the best SW album to me lately, and I loved it sound. Maybe I’ll listen further this HP.
[/COLOR]
I�m sorry but now you�ll be the recipient: I will never ever do an MP3 version! Never!
What is it with this question anyway? Just fire up google and ask for how to make mp3 – Google-Suche (http://www.google.de/search?q=how+to+make+mp3)
Tu me prend pour un con ? Tu aurais pu toucher un plus large public si tu faisait une version mp3. Je vais devoir convertir ton album avec Audacity, et faire un lien pour ceux qui n’ont pas la chance de l’avoir a cause du format.
Yes, it is nice to have an MP3 version – but tools like dBpoweramp make this conversion process take about 20 seconds.
Thanks again to SonicAdventure for making such an awesome remastered DeLuxe edition. If you do one for CoS, make sure you post it in this thread, I’m sure many here would be interested!
Well, that’s a tough comment and not a constructive one. Just consider one minute the effort and the care from SonicAdventure to make that available to you. Maybe you’re so spoiled with a thousand downloads here and there that you think a 2CD Flac is going to suck too much of your time compared to your usual stuff. Come on, you’re certainly not a lazzy man. I’m sure everybody needing mp3’s from this didn’t ask and already downloaded it.
Please be grateful and speak as an adult…
mp3’s have no interest for a sound restoration project anyway. I guess you can find the recording sessions in mp3.
1. I "remaster" with the highest quality possible to me. Quality is everything to me – FLAC protects that quality because it�s lossless. mp3 is lossy, you loose 80% of the signal with mp3 in 320 kB/s but the files are only half as big (FLAC: 775 mb, MP3: 380 mb) – senseless.
2. Making mp3 is as easy as possible. DBPowerAmp, foobar and other programs do this out of the box fast and perfect. When you are complaining that the files are not in mp3 then it�s not because I think you�re dumb (very probably you have other qualities I don�t have), it�s because I think that you are lazy.
3. You can make mp3 out of FLAC – but you cannot make FLAC out of mp3. What�s lost stays lost.
4. If the public you were referring to doesn�t download because it�s not in mp3 then that�s insanely stupid. I�m offering highest quality and people complain because they want worse? Makes absolutely no sense.
I�m just thinking about what would have happened if I would have uploaded my 24 Bit / 96 kHz masterfiles! People wouldn�t have been able to burn the files, upload them to their mp3 players or wouldn�t benefit from the quality because they never heard about samplerates and bit depth. Scandalous!!
———- Post added at 12:42 PM ———- Previous post was at 12:32 PM ———-
Sometimes we can / and have to be proud, notably when sharing some significant efforts about our passions. Yes, you are demanding toward yourself first, and now you want to be understood what makes you demanding toward the listeners too wishing they’ll give all their thoughts on the work done. I think it’s how you experience your ego in that case. I fully understand that, and that’s always a fair pleasure indeed on some serious edit and sound work when someone pops in and is able to spot every little things you did, and to understand every choice you made. 100% positive feedbacks is nice, but not always helping. It’s often the tougher comments that will help, and unfortunately on most forums like this one everyone has to keep cute and kind, not to hurt any one with critiscism… which doesn’t help at all in the end. I know.
I have downloaded your stuff out of curiosity but I can’t listen too much music from that composer, in particular recent scores. True that the sound reminded me right away "Attack Of The Clones" (and would have, even if you wouldn’t have mentioned it) wich I haven’t heard since 5 years perhaps. That was for me the best SW album to me lately, and I loved it sound. Maybe I’ll listen further this HP.
You are right, the thougher comments will always help if I�ve overseen something. Then I possibly can get back and correct some mistakes. But criticism has to be grounded and realistic. Something like "Where�s the mp3?" really makes me furious. During the last days I was thinking if I was overreacting but I think that I�m not because mp3 would be ironic considering my efforts. I mean, I do the same if I want to listen to this score on my portable player: I take my master files and create .ogg from them. But the original stay in their original form, I can always go back and do something else. With lossy material like WMA, mp3 or ogg this is prohibitive because I already lost information I could use for processing.
And it�s true, John Williams has become very complex during the last years. I for one love this but many people miss his style from 30 years back. I think that a composer like Williams matures over the years and that he refines his compositorial qualities and that�s the real treat for me.
2. I fear that the RIAA, the copyright holders or anyone else involved with these things also hate me since I "steal" away some of their profits. People may experience my versions as the better sounding, more complete, better designed, whatever version compared to the official versions so that these people won�t buy the original ones: profit decreased -> extremely bad! They may not care about quality but they still do care about the money I may deprive them from. Well, we still have an advantage: the score industry is comparatively small to other music genres and really not important when viewed from a purely business point (there are exceptions of course but they are rare). A part of what we do works like free advertising, this is at least what it did to me. In the past five years I bought almost anything I downloaded. I downloaded it because I didn�t have it myself (it for example wasn�t available back then) and a few years later it gets re-released again. What am I doing? I�m buying it. I discovered new composers by downloading and then I wanted to own their scores myself. What am I doing? I�m buying them. If "Harry Potter & The Philospher’s Stone" would be re-released expanded officially I�d buy it without thinking. That�s how I always have done it. And I�m always hoping that some people are like me.
So much for today… 🙂
By the way, Burneggroll who is a member here has a few posts really interesting to read about copyrights & co. See here: http://forums.ffshrine.org/f7/ffshrine-legal-faqs-others-i-recommend-being-97977/#post1842895 , and also you can ckeck the link at the botom of the OP from my sig leading to one of his posts from the sticky thread "music than can not be posted…", or check it directly.
Time to stop highjacking your thread from feedbacks now, maybe… 😉
2. Making mp3 is as easy as possible. DBPowerAmp, foobar and other programs do this out of the box fast and perfect. When you are complaining that the files are not in mp3 then it�s not because I think you�re dumb (very probably you have other qualities I don�t have), it�s because I think that you are lazy.
3. You can make mp3 out of FLAC – but you cannot make FLAC out of mp3. What�s lost stays lost.
4. If the public you were referring to doesn�t download because it�s not in mp3 then that�s insanely stupid. I�m offering highest quality and people complain because they want worse? Makes absolutely no sense.
I�m just thinking about what would have happened if I would have uploaded my 24 Bit / 96 kHz masterfiles! People wouldn�t have been able to burn the files, upload them to their mp3 players or wouldn�t benefit from the quality because they never heard about samplerates and bit depth. Scandalous!![COLOR="Silver"]
Et le poids d’un FLAC compar� � un mp3, tu y as pens� ?? Tout le monde n’as pas autant de place que toi dans son ordinateur.
Je te trouve un peu culott� d’etre aussi dur avec lui , il aurait tout aussi bien pu ne rien faire du tout. Un logiciel pour convertir ne prend pas tant de place. Et de plus il y a des disques durs externes sur price minister pour 20 30 euros.
Et pour la conversion, j’ai d�ja Audacity. Je viens de terminer la conversion, je l’h�berge l�
I’d like to thank you for the effort you put into this remaster, as well as for deciding to share it with the community. Great job with the covers, too, I love the top-left one 😀
I have to say sorry and congratulate you. Instead of just complaining you did something about it; that�s the spirit. Well done and thank you!
i just recall how Arial made the existing TDK sountrack sound even better than the official release, lol
with that said, i’m looking forward to listen to this JW gem. thank you! 😀
amazing job on the remasters, thanks a lot! 😀
… I’m sure you are but you just didn’t know. I think it’s a matter of priorities (quantity/quality). Not that Quality is "absolutely" better than Quantity but we’re unfortunately living in a world where quantity as taken too much place and blinds us.
Seriously, though, thank you one hundred times over for all the care, time and trouble you’ve taken in this. I only ever settle for MP3 when there’s no other alternative; quite why people would want a poorer version when they have the opportunity to have this in FLAC is beyond me.
thanks for the re-up!!!
I second this! And thank you for Air Force One Sonic. It sounds fantastic!
I was just wondering, however, if you would be okay if someone else were to reupload your work here? If not, how would reupload via PM sound? I respect your wishes, SonicAdventure, and I only want other people to experience the incredible work you’ve done.
Oh, and fantastic work on your other "Deluxe Edition" scores!
I was just wondering, however, if you would be okay if someone else were to reupload your work here? If not, how would reupload via PM sound? I respect your wishes, SonicAdventure, and I only want other people to experience the incredible work you’ve done.
Oh, and fantastic work on your other "Deluxe Edition" scores!
You could have uploaded the score again without asking me. So I find it extremely nice of you to ask! Thank you very much for this. Yes, load it up again! It�s dangerous for me but it might not be dangerous for you if you�re willing to take the risk.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone: DeLuxe Edition – John Williams [FLAC]
http://www.4shared.com/rar/zbVr2AMm/JW_HPTPS_DE.html
What more can be said about this amazing upgrade by SonicAdventure of one of the most magical scores in recent memory? Not much, really. Just skim through the comments in this thread and know that the high praise is deserved. What are you waiting for?
Hehe, I actually have the original folder SonicAdventure made, but I’ve long forgotten the password to it. So, I just made a new one. Accidentally included some extra cover art not made by SonicAdventure, inlcuding some CD art. Whoops. Oh, and although the cover art displayed above is my personal favourite, choose whichever you like!
Thank you for the re-share of this older Edition, I hope it doesn�t create any problems for you. Regarding the cover art… it�s nice of you to include the CD art – that�s the one I simply forgot. Shame on me… no, really, it bothers me to this day that I forgot it… but not enough that it prompts me to create one. So thank you for providing them.
I gotta say, this presentation is ssooo much better than what’s available on the commercial album. I absolutely love it!
Tried the link twice with and without jdownloader. Doesn’t work.
I think you need to be at least a registered free user to download it with the Jdownloader.
I think you need to be at least a registered free user to download it with the Jdownloader.
Thanks, that worked.
I love SA’s Deluxe Editions… excellent work.
I am glad to hear that. 😉
Seconded!
I mean: the "Sonic" edition would rock more than "Deluxe"… And you could give your followers an idea of how successful or proud you are about each release… By this I mean you can use these combinaisons: "Ultra-Sonic Edition", "Super or Hyper-Sonic…", "Sonic-Blast edition", "Sonic steel", and what else… !
I mean: the "Sonic" edition would rock more than "Deluxe"… And you could give your followers an idea of how successful or proud you are about each release… By this I mean you can use these combinaisons: "Ultra-Sonic Edition", "Super or Hyper-Sonic…", "Sonic-Blast edition", "Sonic steel", and what else… !
Correct me If I’m wrong but you seem to be poking fun at the man already. Sounds rude to me like a joke out of tune!
Sonic knows me very well.
… And I don’t see where is the fun. Though yes, I think these kind of denomination would be more funny as well as a good clue of what Sonic considers his work to be. So it’s indeed about fun, but not at Sonic’s detriment. I do think it’s a good idea. (Correct me if I’m wrong).
Next to that I can’t comment on the work itself if you think (fairly) I should be kind enough to say "thanks" or to give feedback. I’m not into that Potter stuff at all. :-/
… And I don’t see where is the fun. Though yes, I think these kind of denomination would be more funny as well as a good clue of what Sonic considers his work to be. So it’s indeed about fun, but not at Sonic’s detriment. I do think it’s a good idea. (Correct me if I’m wrong).
Next to that I can’t comment on the work itself if you think (fairly) I should be kind enough to say "thanks" or to give feedback. I’m not into that Potter stuff at all. :-/
Well good for you. I hope.
I mean: the "Sonic" edition would rock more than "Deluxe"… And you could give your followers an idea of how successful or proud you are about each release… By this I mean you can use these combinaisons: "Ultra-Sonic Edition", "Super or Hyper-Sonic…", "Sonic-Blast edition", "Sonic steel", and what else… !
Or Sonic’s hard-on? 😀
No, I�ll leave it at ‘Deluxe Edition’. Thing is I�m not really proud when it comes to my editions. I�m happy with most of them because I listen to them myself and that�s hardly reason for being proud of them. They are "my work" so to speak but they aren�t my children. I have used this title for so many years now, it simply stuck. What is curious however is that other companies NOT being Varese start to use them too. I have already thought about the possibility that my editions are to fault. That would be an engaging and at the same time frightening thought, wouldn�t it?
@ GrannyGooz: thank you very much for defending my honour. It was charming to read your answer, I loved it (and you know I adore you). But you can relax, Arial and I indeed know each other and he�s allowed to say that (I�ve said before that I value criticism and you should have read what he wrote about the cover for ‘TRON:Legacy’ when I made all my symbols blue :D).
And now to the both of you: Shut it!
😉
Granny: I told you once smileys break the jokes, mostly sarcastic ones. 😀
😉
With pleasure. 😉
@Arial 🙂
In the spirit of re-posting things, here is the cover I made for those who may prefer the "Sorcerer’s Stone" title. I tried to mimic Sonic’s style but he is better at the Photoshop stuff then me.
I mean: the "Sonic" edition would rock more than "Deluxe"… And you could give your followers an idea of how successful or proud you are about each release… By this I mean you can use these combinaisons: "Ultra-Sonic Edition", "Super or Hyper-Sonic…", "Sonic-Blast edition", "Sonic steel", and what else… !
‘Sonic-Boom Edition’ ? lol
Thing is I�m not really proud when it comes to my editions.
Well i beg to differ. You should be proud of your work! if it wasnt for your talents on sound the score wouldnt be heard this way ever probably. I can tell by listening that you have a lot of passion towards music. You have made a lot of listeners enjoy something they have already enjoyed a hell of a lot more! If your not proud then ill be proud for you 🙂
Thank you for the upgrade also! ill be sure to post my feedback as always.
Track 29 "The Chess Game" extracted fine for me using Unarchiver.
Here is that one track re-uploaded…
http://filewinds.com/g5pt9cj6i8sv/29_-_The_Chess_Game.flac.html
This was still worth listening, despite being allergical to this Po-Potter stuff. But I’m not surprised he did better. 😉
No, never. I hate that score as it sounds like being made for a TV movie. The Order of the Phoenix however would be something else.
I�ve read that too… though I can�t imagine that a composer would say something like that about Williams. After all, his Potter scores are also slightly influenced by Vaughan Williams who was one of the quintessential British composers.
Thank you very much.
Here is that one track re-uploaded…
Download The Chess Game flac (http://filewinds.com/g5pt9cj6i8sv/29_-_The_Chess_Game.flac.html)Thanks a lot for that indeed! 😀
Turned out that something had gone wrong in the download as the four files didn’t even register as being one archive.
Once I re-downloaded parts 2-3-4 though, it worked properly.
Exactly. Though the Half-Blood Prince still comes along as Pedestrian and I find it really curious that such a minimalistic score was composed for a movie as this.
BTW, it also baffles me that this release of mine receives this much attention after almost two years when the music for the sequel sounds so much better and also presents the more rounded listening experience. Over 1.000 additional views in just two days. It took ‘The Chamber of Secrets’ another day to achieve that feat and I wonder why that is…
So… how long before we get to hear the real deal for Prisoner of Azkaban…?
BTW, it also baffles me that this release of mine receives this much attention after almost two years when the music for the sequel sounds so much better and also presents the more rounded listening experience. Over 1.000 additional views in just two days. It took ‘The Chamber of Secrets’ another day to achieve that feat and I wonder why that is…Chamber of Secrets may be considered quite a bit of a retread of the original. Not to mention, you’ve had two years to build anticipation.
So… how long before we get to hear the real deal for Prisoner of Azkaban…?
When the elitists decide that it�s time for us common people to have it.
Chamber of Secrets may be considered quite a bit of a retread of the original. Not to mention, you’ve had two years to build anticipation.
True, and then there�s also John Williams self-referencing his material (or Williams Ross did it). I find many clear references to ‘Episode II’, not only in the Quidditch music but also in the motifs for Lucius Malfoy. I�ve never heard this amount of self-referencing from Williams to this extent until ‘Chamber of Secrets’. He was most clearly pressed for time. However, I enjoy it very much nonetheless.
And thanks again!!
Have you or anyone else got any clue if it is "out there" at all? I’ve never heard of anyone actually having it.
True, and then there�s also John Williams self-referencing his material (or Williams Ross did it). I find many clear references to ‘Episode II’, not only in the Quidditch music but also in the motifs for Lucius Malfoy. I�ve never heard this amount of self-referencing from Williams to this extent until ‘Chamber of Secrets’. He was most clearly pressed for time. However, I enjoy it very much nonetheless.Apparently John Williams did end up composing all the music himself, but clearly there was quite a bit of time pressure. Not surprising though; four films in a year!?!
Home Alone 2 is also pretty high on self-referencing. Strange really, since most of his sequel scores are such unique compositions on their own.
Have you or anyone else got any clue if it is "out there" at all? I’ve never heard of anyone actually having it.
I�ve found a tracklist for it some months ago online. Furthermore when kGray released the stuff he found many people used to trading with elitists clearly used ‘Prisoner of Azkaban’ as intended blackmail; along with ‘The DaVinci Code’ (which was shared some days later by scorepranos) they said that he isn�t supposed to be doing that because then no one will ever hear ‘Prisonder of Azkaban’. So yes, I�m certain that they exist and are floating around "internally" but that we (the cheap trailer trash that we are) are not yet supposed to have it.
Apparently John Williams did end up composing all the music himself, but clearly there was quite a bit of time pressure. Not surprising though; four films in a year!?!
Home Alone 2 is also pretty high on self-referencing. Strange really, since most of his sequel scores are such unique compositions on their own.
Yes, he composed every new theme and might have been composing the pieces that contain those themes while William Ross concerned himself with interpolating the material composed for the first movie, in some cases getting direct instructions from Williams how and when to use which theme or arrangement.
Yes, he composed every new theme and might have been composing the pieces that contain those themes while William Ross concerned himself with interpolating the material composed for the first movie, in some cases getting direct instructions from Williams how and when to use which theme or arrangement.
I love this edition Sonic, It has the best sound I know and I always listen to it on my travels! 🙂
As to Chamber of Secrets, Williams actually composed every note of it, Ross was merely the "handler" and his duties were mainly moved to conducting the score!
Still, it’s impressive considering his heavy workload for 2002. Even the Quidditch/Chase through Coruscant and Lucious Malfoy/Dooku/Separatist parallels are perhaps great expansions of eachother considering neither was full or officially released.
That’s high praise from me, the serial set-maker heh so good job!
Please, re-upload again.
Thanks.
Please, re-upload again.
Thanks.
Yeah Right… you mean apart from the GE.TT links ?.
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone: DeLuxe Edition – John Williams [FLAC]
http://www.4shared.com/rar/zbVr2AMm/JW_HPTPS_DE.html
What more can be said about this amazing upgrade by SonicAdventure of one of the most magical scores in recent memory? Not much, really. Just skim through the comments in this thread and know that the high praise is deserved. What are you waiting for?
Hehe, I actually have the original folder SonicAdventure made, but I’ve long forgotten the password to it. So, I just made a new one. Accidentally included some extra cover art not made by SonicAdventure, inlcuding some CD art. Whoops. Oh, and although the cover art displayed above is my personal favourite, choose whichever you like!
Sorry so much dear friends……but this link really works….
Thanks for a great work!!!!
That’s high praise from me, the serial set-maker heh so good job!
🙂 Thanks! When I crossfade tracks I always do so with respect to the scenes they were written for. I don�t want to destroy any mood the composer was trying to create. Sometimes I fail of course so some of my transitions suck in hindsight. I�ve already thought about doing this set again… but I�m not in the mood for it. Besides, after a while my botched transitions don�t bother me anymore.
But why don�t you go ahead and share your version?
The first one I noticed was you used both "Don’t Burn My Letters" and "Mail Delivery" in an edit, but separated it from "The Beach and Arrival of Hagrid." I Actually did it the other way that ‘Don’t Burn My Letters’ was one track, and the next was ‘Mail Delivery’ and ‘The Beach and Arrival of Hagrid’ which are intended to overlap.
I also noticed you created an ending for "You’re A Wizard Harry!" which is understandable… Something must have happened to the end of that cue because even ripping it from the Blu Ray, the music is only heard in the front channels starting at EXACTLY the same moment where it cuts off on the session leak which makes me think some error occurred in the recording which wasn’t caught right away.
I separated "Arrival at Hogwarts" and "Entry into the Great Hall" which you layered VERY expertly. I like how you did it!
‘Lonely First Night’ I noticed you placed on your set twice. Although the sessions present it as an alternate, they are identical except what seems like a minor edit in one. Otherwise, layering the takes, they’re identical.
The next one I noticed was how you layered the "Troll in the Dungeon" track with "Fighting the Troll" that was something I did myself very similar to what you did heh
The "Cast a Christmas Spell" is different than mine but only because I did something a bit different. I used the album mix which I know what you’re saying "it has no ending!" I created one.
I also replicated the tracked music cue "Petrified Longbottom."
For the chess game, I put it all as one track.
And PS: Love the "Things To Come" track!
I made a little pack of just the couple tracks to show you what I did:
EDIT:
https://mega.co.nz/#!ud9zVQKQ!DA4iH1JQTeEXG9NrkenEuFVxQg4hdSoLLyfvU8h 6VB4
Oh, but some of them are really botched. If I can still spot them after more than two years, then they�re not very good I think.
The first one I noticed was you used both "Don’t Burn My Letters" and "Mail Delivery" in an edit, but separated it from "The Beach and Arrival of Hagrid." I Actually did it the other way that ‘Don’t Burn My Letters’ was one track, and the next was ‘Mail Delivery’ and ‘The Beach and Arrival of Hagrid’ which are intended to overlap.
Your transition from ‘Mail Delivery’ to ‘The Beach and Arrival Of Hagrid’ is lovely! I wish I�d have thought of that…
I also noticed you created an ending for "You’re A Wizard Harry!" which is understandable… Something must have happened to the end of that cue because even ripping it from the Blu Ray, the music is only heard in the front channels starting at EXACTLY the same moment where it cuts off on the session leak which makes me think some error occurred in the recording which wasn’t caught right away.
Yes, I can still spot the ending I ‘created’. It�s simply faded out with added reverb. And it still sounds horrible.
I separated "Arrival at Hogwarts" and "Entry into the Great Hall" which you layered VERY expertly. I like how you did it!
Thanks. That�s one of the transitions I cannot spot anymore.
‘Lonely First Night’ I noticed you placed on your set twice. Although the sessions present it as an alternate, they are identical except what seems like a minor edit in one. Otherwise, layering the takes, they’re identical.
Crap. I knew there was something I�ve overlooked.
The "Cast a Christmas Spell" is different than mine but only because I did something a bit different. I used the album mix which I know what you’re saying "it has no ending!" I created one.
Yeah, but where does your source come from? The stage sounds quite awkward. And it�s very loud… I should have done it that way. I mean, not as loud as yours, but definitely louder than mine.
And PS: Love the "Things To Come" track!
You do? Not many do. It�s in fact part of the track ‘Running to McGonagall’… if I remember correctly. But one of the freedoms one does have when doing editions like these is to place tracks at my own convenience. And I felt the set needed something spectacular as an ending, something that foreshadowed the drama of the movies yet to come.
BTW, I love that your pieces are in 24 bit.
And your transition from ‘Chess Game’ to ‘Checkmate’ is wonderful. That�s actually one of my own, botched transitions where I�ve always thought "Shit, I should have done that right in the first place". It just fits so well, is thematically and emotionally connected. Just like yours.
BUT: you do have some tonal issues. The music sounds very aggressive yet lacks crispness or high frequency detail. Also, some of your fades create problems caused by something that sounds a lot like quantization errors. What audio editor are you using? Third, your set is quite loud. I did the same but what did you use to raise the gain? Because your set has some 0dBfs errors. Fourth, very deep bass is very strong. On many tracks this is helpful, but on some of the softer tracks it uses up too much energy better spent for other parts of the frequency spectrum (I�m talking about energy used for driving any loudspeaker).
On the other hand: your dynamic compression sounds better than mine. The thing that has been bothering me the most during the past two years is the automated dynamic compression I used (to make soft parts louder and loud parts smaller). On the follow-up set I did it all by hand with automated faders which avoids pumping artifacts.
Ah, forgive me, I couldn�t help myself. I don�t want to attack you or anything, it�s just that I can�t help it. I do this all the time, usually ending up trying to ‘make it better’.
As for your question about fades I have no idea what you’re asking lol… sry :-/ I’m not trained. I do a lot by ear
As for your question about the ghosts, I used the album. The ending I recreated as best as I could using my ears to replicate the echo used in the album and replicate the synth in the background, taking it from the Library tracks which use that instrument sound. heh
keep up the good work 🙂 I missed this the first time around
I know I’m ridiculously late to this party but, besides the fact I LOVE your work, Sonic, I for one would be EXTREMELY GRATEFUL if you were ever to upload your masterfiles 🙂
It would only elevate the appreciation of the quality of work you do, I’m sure. DAKoftheOTA his 24bit Vinyl uploads I hold in high regard as well 🙂
———- Post added at 06:43 AM ———- Previous post was at 06:40 AM ———-
Hey gals and guys, it�s back online! From me of all people! Get it here: ‘Harry Potter & The Philosopher’s Stone Deluxe Edition’ (Thread 97866) Yes, it now has even better sound and also included updated covers.
Please someone upload this to MEGA. Mirrorcreator isn’t usuable on my tablet. Sorry.
———- Post added at 06:43 AM ———- Previous post was at 06:40 AM ———-
Please someone upload this to MEGA. Mirrorcreator isn’t usuable on my tablet. Sorry.
Again? Do you even read full threads for mirrors? Use the 4shared mirror. It took me two minutes to download the full album…
You should really at least try other links before requesting a host that Sonic doesn’t use any way…
Well then, don’t mind if I do!
Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone: DeLuxe Edition – John Williams [FLAC]
http://www.4shared.com/rar/zbVr2AMm/JW_HPTPS_DE.html
What more can be said about this amazing upgrade by SonicAdventure of one of the most magical scores in recent memory? Not much, really. Just skim through the comments in this thread and know that the high praise is deserved. What are you waiting for?
Hehe, I actually have the original folder SonicAdventure made, but I’ve long forgotten the password to it. So, I just made a new one. Accidentally included some extra cover art not made by SonicAdventure, inlcuding some CD art. Whoops. Oh, and although the cover art displayed above is my personal favourite, choose whichever you like!
Please someone upload this to MEGA. Mirrorcreator isn’t usuable on my tablet. Sorry.
Then you should either use a stationary PC / laptop or you should do something about Mirrorcreator not downloading on your tablet (probably a restriction on part of manufacturer/OS/No Flash). I will not give some special treatment to people just because they have limited technical means.
And I will repeat another thing: my uploads are not 24 bit! I use this bitdepth (actually it�s 32 bit floating point) only during production to retain the quality. Inside my 32 bit files is nothing more than the plain old 16 bit files everyone has. Besides, 24 bit on a tablet? I�d like to see a tablet that�s capable of that (OTG-enabled DAC?).
Sounds like a firewall issue. Are you using someone else’s ISP ?. It may only be a matter of time before Mega is blocked.
Tried the 4shared mirror and it wouldn’t load the ad, so I couldn’t download it. Downloaded jDownloader and all of a sudden my computer had 13 pieces of malware.
Any chance of someone putting it up on MEGA?
Any chance of someone putting it up on MEGA?
I’ve re uploaded a mirror on MEGA for you and anyone else who still want to get their hands on this.
Enjoy! 🙂
Link: https://mega.nz/#!JtxyQagB!3QSq0hq2JsxwhCZ0xVCNuTTd1W5Jc4Qwuef-Z4r9d74
Password: ReShared (same as Sonic’s original password)
Don’t know why as my vinyl rips are lousy due to my shitty turntable (hence why I’ve stopped making rips and had my thread locked) :p
I’ve re uploaded a mirror on MEGA for you and anyone else who still want to get their hands on this.
Enjoy! 🙂
Link: https://mega.nz/#!JtxyQagB!3QSq0hq2JsxwhCZ0xVCNuTTd1W5Jc4Qwuef-Z4r9d74
Password: ReShared (same as Sonic’s original password)
Thanks for the re-up, I never grabbed this. Up till now I’ve only had the OST.
Enjoy! 🙂
Link: https://mega.nz/#!JtxyQagB!3QSq0hq2JsxwhCZ0xVCNuTTd1W5Jc4Qwuef-Z4r9d74
Password: ReShared (same as Sonic’s original password)
Cheers! Thanks for the reupload, and thanks to Sonic for the original share/work. I’ve been loving his Chamber of Secrets and wanting to listen to this ever since.
EDIT: Listening now, and this has absolutely taken me back fifteen years.
Enjoy! 🙂
Link: https://mega.nz/#!JtxyQagB!3QSq0hq2JsxwhCZ0xVCNuTTd1W5Jc4Qwuef-Z4r9d74
Password: ReShared (same as Sonic’s original password)
Thanks for the re-up! 🙂
Enjoy! 🙂
Link: https://mega.nz/#!JtxyQagB!3QSq0hq2JsxwhCZ0xVCNuTTd1W5Jc4Qwuef-Z4r9d74
Password: ReShared (same as Sonic’s original password)
Thanks for the reup.
Much appreciated!
Thanks for the flowers… but I would say that it turned (slightly) wonderful only just a few days ago 🙂
🙂
Happy Holidays! 🙂
🙂
Well… I never talked about this (at least I don’t think so) but I have attempted to remaster the original Star Wars trilogy in the past. And I failed. Either, it’s too much work or it’s impossible. The scores were recorded on sub-standard material and one cannot compensate for that. Besides, sharing them isn’t allowed anyway since they are Fox. In addition to that I never liked them (I know, scandalous). I’m much more interested in the prequels, those are my favourite Star Wars scores.
———- Post added at 12:55 PM ———- Previous post was at 12:50 PM ———-
Thanks Again!
Happy Holidays! 🙂
To you too 🙂
So, regarding SW OT, not even a future official remastered release would sound better, because of the way they were recorded?. That’s terrible.
PD: They are Fox?. I though they were Disney now… well, there goes my hope for Deluxe Editions for the prequels.
PD2: What about Indiana Jones first three scores?. There are pitch errors in the latest expansion (2008).
Thanks again and keep them coming!
🙂
So, regarding SW OT, not even a future official remastered release would sound better, because of the way they were recorded?. That’s terrible.
PD: They are Fox?. I though they were Disney now… well, there goes my hope for Deluxe Editions for the prequels.
PD2: What about Indiana Jones first three scores?. There are pitch errors in the latest expansion (2008).
Thanks again and keep them coming!
🙂
I don’t know if they’re already Disney. At least Disney hasn’t re-released them yet (I think). And unless they don’t find new methods of restoring badly in-shape tapes AND hire an expert to mix them anew AND give them to someone for mastering who isn’t afraid to adapt the sound to more contemporary quality levels (-> restoring the Tomlinson sound as if he would have recorded them today) instead of "staying oh so close to the times it was made in, it’s historic and it needs to show", we won’t receive better sound.
The first 3 Indys have pitch errors? I might have spotted those on the second Indy. But that’s the only one of the three I have tackled yet. Because, let’s be frank, that one has always sounded the worst. Unlike most other people, I’m not of the opinion that the 2008 remaster for the first Indy is bad.
I probably won’t do Deluxe Editions for the Hunger Games scores. As much as I like James Newton Howard. But those scores are not for me. However, Fink and I did some sort of Best-Of: http://forums.ffshrine.org/showthread.php?t=197599&highlight=
While looking around I found this thread (Thread 81069). Maybe it can help?
Thanks for the amazing first two soundtracks tho! 😉
While looking around I found this thread (Thread 81069). Maybe it can help?
Thanks for the amazing first two soundtracks tho! 😉
Yes, I’m looking for source material. Though… I’m mostly interested in Prisoner Of Azkaban, that way, the Williams-Potter scores would be complete. But PoA is the only one that hasn’t leaked. And the material in the thread you linked to? Unusable as it’s a rip from DVD and includes sound effects. Impossible to work with, good quality cannot be achieved.
Edit:
Funny, just today a new revised complete score arrived.
Besides a reupload of your version, will you maybe make a new version now based on the new sources?
Edit:
Funny, just today a new revised complete score arrived.
Besides a reupload of your version, will you maybe make a new version now based on the new sources?
I’m perfectly happy with my version and I don’t think I can it improve further by using new sources. For one, the new sources are not better than the ones I had (I used lossless sessions). Besides, to my knowledge it already contains !most! of the music composed for the movie.
Edit:
Funny, just today a new revised complete score arrived.
Besides a reupload of your version, will you maybe make a new version now based on the new sources?
There aren’t any new lossless sources. What I meant was that I used lossless sources, as opposed to my original edit from a few years back. I probably should have worded that better. I didn’t even know SonicAdventures made an edit until just now, but I’m assuming we used the exact same sources (leaked sessions).
If you too used the sessions, yes, in that case we used the same sources. Meaning, I won’t need to update my version. Phew 🙂
Neither the MP3 or FLAC links are working.
Neither the MP3 or FLAC links are working.
Until the link is repaired you can get my edit here if you’d like:
Thread 218469
Neither the MP3 or FLAC links are working.
Dear, your inbox is full, I can’t send you a message 🙂
———- Post added at 05:22 AM ———- Previous post was at 05:21 AM ———-
Try now
Thank you in advance!
Thank you in advance!
It’s kind of outdated now that the real complete scores have been released.
Well, the version for this is not less "real complete". While I haven’t listened to it yet (listening and working on Azkaban instead) I don’t think that this new LLL release is (much) better than my own. And this is not arrogance, it’s objective comparison.
I’d love to get your feedback on the LLL release of the three scores! Personally, I think they did a great job with the Sorcerer’s Stone, and the sound is great, even with my studio monitors. 🙂 On the whole, this 7-cd collection is a massive collection of music, and I hope they are complete.
I have only listened to Azkaban yet and the sound for that is certainly ok. I would have done the frequency response differently and gain is all over the place from piece to piece (including differences between pieces that are the same). Azkaban also contains some truly lossy parts (roughly 3 minutes over the whole running time I would surmise) but it isn’t audible. Mattessino did a good job – for Azkaban at least. I will listen in detail to the first two once I start to re-do my own Editions (because merely "ok" doesn’t cut it for me, I need to have it perfect).
Oh, boy – brilliant!
Online Casino South Africa
Online Casino New Zealand
Online Casino India
Online Casino Australia
Online Casino UK
Online Casino Canada
