The temp tracks issue

i'm sure everyone who's looked for work in the field has got this on almost every occasion, now i don't mean to say that's not a good reference, if you're being payed for it, you better deliver, how true. but-

how is it that someone is paying for a composer to bring something that actually isn't his, its just about the same as drawing boris vallejo by brom, or Michaelangelo by anonymous. where is anonymous being original?

where is the uniqueness that the producer wanted to promote his work? if you want to stand out, you'd want it totally different. does those who play on the safe side really get more work? why is that so common trade?

in short, no one is really taking a risk and thus ruining his chance of ever standing out in the crowd, isnt that lame? the worst part that its creating a generation of copycats composers.

and you can see that in films and tv, everything now is hollywood styled, indie films actually have that advantage but they are also filled with people who want to, obviously, make a living, thus creating another cycle in this "original" market.

i don't know how many people will disagree here, but i think its for their benefit if they were requested to create their own interpretation rather than copy other people works, well "vibe" is the right word. we're stealing the atmosphere, the spirit of it, the orchestration, in worst cases even the some of the melody, the great ones even did it-take john williams fanfare, straight from the original aaron copland.

i think it shows lack of courage or trust from the producer and the musician part, and it may be because of incompetence of both, since you see that in the really original films, matrix, LOTR some new levels were introduced, even though they were stolen too, someone trusted someone abit more.

I think temp tracks are useful, but how restricting it is depends on the project and director, etc etc.

I've worked with people who changed their stuff around my music, and other times where I've changed stuff around edits made to the visuals as well as working with and without a tempt track. Sometimes it's just like "Hey you know this song? Make something in that vibe."

Sometimes though you gotta trust yourself to whip out something different than the temp track to show how a scene/whatever may actually have more impact with different music, or sometimes no music. A lot of it rides on the type of project, like I said. Indie films are the best to work with in this regard since you can usually exchange ideas and craft something more original or at least that passes better than just "copy X."

Lol. Evil temp tracks, eh? Sounds familiar.

They can be useful as a composer. Say you're working on a track and you just don't know where to start, great thing to do is just throw other music on top of the picture and see how well it fits. Then you copy it. It's not the most daring solution, but the clients don't want your music to be revolutionary; they want it to match the video.

( 1¢ ) ( 1¢ ) = My two cents

-John

Innovation is overrated. If that was the goal of the entertainment industry, we might just have a lot more info-tainment like this...

http://videos.nymag.com/video/Late-Night-Isabella-Rossellinis#c=HDX0M117PJ010JDX&t=Late%20Night:%20Isabella%20Rossellini%27s%20Weird%20Bed%20Bug%20Sex%20Scene

"Is this going to get weird?"

No doubt...

I've never had an issue with temp tracks myself, philosophically or practically.

The way I see it, I speak music but my client might not, so instead of wasting time trying to decipher what they might mean by "I want it golden, like wheat" (true example), I can hear what they consider to be wheat-y right off the bat. As far as I'm concerned, whether they leave no temp track and try to explain it to me, or they put in a temp track and show me, the end result is the same: I understand what they're after, what they're looking for, and what they think works best for their picture. In either instance, that is my starting point.

Barring the few necessary times where I've been asked to do very close copies of temp tracks (which I mostly refuse to do), I always use the temp track as nothing more than a sort of tangible spotting session that I can refer to at any time. From that perspective, it's really a convenience. To the point of whether or not it colours the way I would have interpreted the scene had I not had the temp track's insidious presence to contend with, I find it's often more a case of how similarly the director and I think than anything else. For example, I have had projects where the temp track just sucked against picture (I thought) but I understood what the director seemed to be after, so I delivered something quite radically different which ended up being perfect. Other times I've agreed with the vibe of the temp track and ended up closer to it with the final product, but not as a result of intentional modeling so much as a mutual agreement between my tastes and the director's that it was the most suitable way to address the action.

Clearly, no temp track means you invent from the ground up in a more literal sense for everything, and I can't argue against the fact that it forces you to be more directly "creative" every time, but I find it to be a sort of weak argument. It's like saying that a chef can't be creatively successful unless s/he invents every single meal from the ground up. In a narrow sense, it's true, but it seems adolescent to force yourself into a psychotic desire to push the envelope of creativity even when it's not necessary or appropriate. And people who blame temp tracks for their own lack of creativity and courage are just scapegoating and I have no respect for that. As far as I'm concerned, if you're a truly creative composer, then there isn't a single barrier, obstacle, or restriction in the universe that can prevent you from expressing it in your work. It's an energy that pervades everything you touch and lends a deeper spirit to your work no matter how tedious or pedantic the subject.

In other words, it's never been about being "safe" for me. It's about delivering the best audio for the project, keeping in mind the context (cultural, social, trends, directorial, etc.) If I feel it's appropriate, or I have a flash of erratic inspiration, I will be more than happy to go completely left field with a cue, regardless of how traditional the temp track may be. As long as I can defend my reasons, I find directors are a lot more open sometimes than we might think. They always say "stick to the temp track, the vibe is perfect and we just want it done", but remember that they're creative people too (mostly) so showing them something exciting and fresh that works (as opposed to weird for the sake of sounding "unique") can have surprising results for you both. Case in point: the latest Battlestar Galactica reboot would have had a typical forgettable sci-fi score if not for the persuasive courage of Bear McCreary, who slowly and successfully pushed for a completely unique sound that has resulted in his rocketing to fame and the music's incredible commercial success even outside of the show. And remember, the worst case scenario is that they say no. Oh well!

If I have more time on my hands for a project, and I have a radically cool idea for a different approach to a cue than what was asked for, I will often do both — then the director has options (they love options) and can see the contrast between what they want and what I think they need. Doesn't mean they'll use the innovative version, but they'll be aware of what could have been and that is enough to open their mind to your creativity for future gigs.

This is why building a solid client base is so important. You stick close to the temp track the first time, but demonstrate your creativity, and then down the road — as J said — you earn some trust. The director mirrors your courage and allows you more freedom. Then you're both operating at optimal levels: you're doing your best work and the director is appreciating and believing in your abilities.

Temp tracks are a bit of a double-edged sword.

Many composers have had their scores rejected because the director ultimately decides to use the temp score as the final score.

However it also gives the composer a very clear example of what the director is looking for and thus can ultimately tailor his/her score to fit what the director is looking for (as Marius explained).

Working without a temp score also has its disadvantages, I've worked on films where there was no temp and the director had some idea, but not really a clear idea of what they were looking for, thus making my job more difficult. Working with someone who "kinda" knows what they want is the worst, as it typically includes a number of revisions.

The best experience I've had was working on a film, with no temp (well, that's kind of a lie, as I composed a very, very terrible, but usable temp score -- written and recorded in under 3 hours), where the director had a clear idea of what they wanted, while allowing me the freedom to interpret the film in my own way, eventually editing to my score -- this doesn't usually happen, I happened to be working with a director who likes to edit to music when possible.

Risks and musical innovation aren't part of film scoring for the most part. I mean, serialism (for example) wasn't born from film scoring. Any "innovation" in scoring comes from the way the music convays the underlying themes/moods/etc. of a given scene and a given film.

Bernard Hermann wasn't an innovative composer, he relied on established musical techniques, but he was an innovative film scorer in that he used them to full effect to enhance the films he worked on.