Yes ofcourse there's a group of PPL who think that's what happened...Anyone else think this is possible??????
They are called "jarre-apologists" and I'm not a member... (you just became one BTW...)
Yes ofcourse there's a group of PPL who think that's what happened...Anyone else think this is possible??????
It perfectly easy enough within a Program Like Protools to alter the Tempo of the tracks without altering the Pitch,so if thats the case then he needs to have seperate Mutiltracks of the instruments if there was Tape stretch with the originals the whole composition would be pitched differently if it was taken directly from a single stereo master track,Just cause they don't sync means absolutely nothing,Its probably another cunning trick that Jarre did to make it seems like they are not the same.if they were analyzed.b.blues wrote:Ok, maybe I'm very thin on this idea but here goes.
We all know that JMJ is a prodigious archiver and that he makes extensive notes when making albums. Is it not possible that he kept a diary as it were of his recording the original and used the original master and his notes as a "guide" to replicating the latest recording. I agree that it is scarily similar to the 1976 version but I just can't see someone with over 30 years experience with record companies trying to pull a fast one on one of the majors or his obsessive fans. We know that album almost as much as if we ourselves had composed and recorded it. It has been dissected over and over for years. He would not make such a mistake.
There is a lot of pot noise(hiss and clicking from the analogue synth knobs being turned) on the new recording that could have been removed on Pro Tools had he simply transferred the original master.
Also have you tried to synch-up both recordings together? Yes the wave forms are very similar. But, They run out of synch with each other. No, not because the new one has slightly longer/different transitions, but when you snch-up the rhythms, they run out of synch and not in the same places as it would have due to tape stretch on the master.
I just think he is possibly THAT PRECISE! And that his extensive notes/archive allowed him to get exactly the right sound.
Some of the zaps and whooshes might have been sampled though and if thats true. So what? He still played the thing in the first place even if some of it is cadged from 1976.
Anyone else think this is possible??????
In other words: you'd love to play with his organ?Kanta wrote:I his music and his instruments, too. Please rude comments about the instruments part.
This is what I have been thinking. Then, this is not Jarre's fault, but the newspaper MOS.CLUBMIX wrote:...isn't it just because on the MOS, there's "the complete original album" written, which seems to make FDM angry?
I guess this is only the beginning...melo wrote:Well, Mr.Jarre need call for his friends: Mr.Jones and Mr.Smith
Example:jp8000 wrote:huh?Kanta wrote:Please rude comments about the instruments part.
Dr_Jones wrote:In other words: you'd love to play with his organ?
Dreyfus | Jarre
A Steven Steilberg Film
WAR OF THE MASTER RECORDINGS
Cert PG
(Synopsis)
Jean Michel is a hard working father who is thrown into turmoil when an invading alien army of deadly Dreyfus machines act his recording studio. The machines are not here to take over the world, but to simply remove all traces of the original 1976 master recordings of the much cherished 'Oxygene', a mystical masterpiece that only one man can keep safe for the human race. So it is left to Jarre to fight for his rights, to fight for the freedom of 'Oxygene', to fight good over evil
You would not get away with simply adding a couple of notes, or even changing the key in which they are played. It takes much more than that to ble classified as a new composition. Music law is not black and white - even *similar* music that is too similar but not identical can be ruled as a violation.Equinoxe wrote: I could do a cover of one of Jarres tracks add a couple of notes to the original melody and copyright it as my own music and Jarre could not sue me,because in the eyes of the Musical copyright law its not the same composition because of minor differences a
You are confusing "publishing" (the work related to commercializing music) and the rights to the master tapes. That's two different things. The latter is about the rights to something mechanical, i.e. the audio on the master tape Jarre made available to Dreyfus in 1976. That is why Dreyfus can keep releasing stuff like Re-Oxygene or the 2004 Essential compilation, as he has "mechanical rights" to the old recordings Jarre made for him.Kubrick wrote: Nothing to do with the sounds. It's about the music. If Jarre plays oxygene with a flute or something, than still are the rights for Dreyfus. Copyrights has nothing to do with the instruments or sounds that used.