Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
Quoting T!M:

Quote:
Correct! A definitive statement from the "powers that be" or a clarification in the Music Credit Table is what we need. I've asked for that many times before, but to no avail just yet...

What I fail to comprehend is; Why the reticence on the part of "The Powers that be" to make such a definitive statement on this matter?

Don't ask me. I understand entirely why we should have a Theme by or whatever. It's not Stargate without that theme, or James Bond without Monty Norman.

Skip

Joe:

I have had this discussion before, there are those who do not comprehend what a SONG is...trust me.

Skip

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
there are those who do not comprehend what a SONG is...trust me.

Indeed there are... But in some cases, the verdict is right there on the screen: 

Quoting an old post by Jykke:

Quote:

Quoting m.cellophane:

Quote:
Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
There you have it in a nutshell folks...thus the problem.

Ken or Gerri: Can we PLEASE, Puhleeease have a ruling here???

We can't have a ruling with the current credit options. A theme is not a score and a theme is not a song with lyrics.

I believe themes can be classified as songs, but that doesn't sit well with those who say they aren't songs. But just because some say they aren't songs doesn't make them scores either.

We need a theme credit option. Until then, the only choice that is true to both sides of the argument is to leave them out.

Looking at the credits posted by Tim, it would seem that the film makers believe that the "Theme from Star Trek: the Motion Picture" is in fact a song......even though it has NO lyrics!

Good enough for me!

Quoting 8ballMax:

Quote:
A "Theme by" credit alone wouldn't solve the "Additional Music" issue though James. Problem is folks aren't leaving them out they are giving them both Composer credit which is bogus.

Quite right. I don't think the crew credit rules allow for anything "additional" (I just hope I didn't vote on this one  )

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I won't argue with filmmakers, but i will argue with someone who gerecally believes a Theme without lyrics is a song.

Then how do you explain the term 'Theme Song'...which Webster's Dictionary defines as "a melody recurring so often in a musical play that it characterizes the production or one of its characters "? 

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I won't argue with filmmakers, but i will argue with someone who gerecally believes a Theme without lyrics is a song.

Then how do you explain the term 'Theme Song'...which Webster's Dictionary defines as "a melody recurring so often in a musical play that it characterizes the production or one of its characters "? 

I really don't understand why this is so hard. On one side, it's obvious that the vast majority of the users wants to track theme writers in DVD Profiler: the nature of the beast means that it's usually a pretty recognizable piece of music, which makes the wish to somehow credit the theme writer in DVD Profiler entirely logical. It's a rather significant contribution, which often also gets a rather prominent credit on-screen. People are bound to enter these somehow - I know I am. Seeing as it's clear that most users are tracking these already, and are not likely to stop doing so, we better come up with a uniform way to do it.

In the current set-up, we either lump the theme writer together with the actual composer of the score - which is very clearly not allowed per the rules - or we can regard them as a "song writer". Unlike using "composer", using "song writer" is NOT prohibited by the rules in any way, no matter how you interpret things. So, using "song writer" (a) you're not violating the rules, (b) you get to track the rather significant musical contribution of the theme writer, and (c) instead of lumping together entirely different things under one job header, you end up with a nicely separated set of credits in your database, clearly distinguishing the actual composer of the score from the theme ("song") writer. I really don't see any downside, while I see multiple huge problems with using "composer".

I'm really not interested in linking to dozens of different definitions of what is, or isn't, a "song" - both sides will be able to come up with lots of them, I'm sure - this is only about how we look at instrumental themes for DVD Profiler purposes, and that is something on which outside definitions should have absolutely no bearing. If Ken would just confirm that for DVD Profiler purposes, an instrumental theme should be considered a "song", then we're good to go. Expanding the music section of the crew credits would work too, of course, but just such a confirmation would be enough to be able to work with this right now.

As for the rest: it's important to realize that a song is a "musical composition" as well. Skip referred to an instrumental theme as a composition, implying that it was composed by a composer. But that is true for any song (with lyrics) as well: every piece of music, whether a lyricist also wrote words to go with it or not, is a composition, composed by a composer. All music is composed, but that doesn't mean every piece of music qualifies for a "composer" credit - that is reserved for the composer of the actual score. The only we can track theme writers is to consider themes as songs for DVD Profiler purposes. You can try to undermine that by repeating your own definitions, but that doesn't help. People WILL track these, and I'd rather have a clear and consistent way of doing that than the current mess.

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Songs by definition also typically have words involved in the composition. See Webster's Dictionary, tim.

Once again: I don't care about outside definitions. This is how we deal with the issue within DVD Profiler. I repeat: the contribution of a theme writers is mostly pretty significant and recognizable, so it's not strange that the majority of the users are tracking them one way or another. You can point to outside definitions until you're blue in the face, but it doesn't help us at all: we really need to establish a uniform way to handle this, as opposed to the current "first one in wins" principle.

Quote:
By your broad definition any piece of music is a song and therefore the Music Composer Credit is totally irrelevant

Again, I really don't want to talk definitions, 'cause it's irrelevant. The only definition of "song" that matters to us, is the one in DVD Profiler's own contribution rules. Unfortunately, there isn't one, and that's the basis of these problems. But in my database, I indeed maintain the simple standard: any original piece of music that is NOT part of the score, whether it has lyrics or not, gets a "song writer" credit. That means that the "composer" credits in my database retain their value: those are all people actually credited with composing the score. Any other original musical contributors get credited too, using the separate "song writer" credit, which clearly distinguishes them from the composers. Again: this is not about definitions, but it's about finding a solution to deal with the data. I'm tracking the composer, and I'm tracking other (original!) musical contributors. Within the current set-up, that seems to be the best solution - better than lumping theme writers together with the composer, essentially rendering the "composer" credit meaningless. I can't help it if it doesn't match with Webster's Dictionary - I'm just trying to deal with the data within the limitations of the software.