Did Funimation ever say why they didn't replace DB's OST?

[Sayo-chan]

Terminator sounds dated because in spite of having Arnold Schwarzenegger, it's a very low budget film, even for the time. Had Cameron had more money, I'm sure they would've gotten a proper orchestra. Terminator 2 had a nearly 100 million dollar budget and this is back in the early 90s. As for DB, the score isn't dated, it's timeless. It fits DB like a glove. It's not a contemporary show, it has an eclectic mix of past, present, and future elements. There are flying cars, but there are dinosaurs.

The main thing that comes to mind from the first is this creepy scene:

How is that crappy? Yes, it's low budget, but does that alone make it terrible?

I disagree. I think it sounds like boring 70s stock music. There's a couple pieces that still sound good, but compared to Osamu Shoji's work, it's amateur.

I didn't say "crappy", I said creepy, which is a good thing. I remember when I was a little kid the way it moved rubbed me the wrong way.

[ABED]

70's stock music? What is so generic about it? It's supposed to sound a bit like a throwback to old Kung Fu flicks.

[Sayo-chan]

70's stock music? What is so generic about it? It's supposed to sound a bit like a throwback to old Kung Fu flicks.

Well most 70s gung fu movies do have notoriously dull soundtracks, so that sounds about right. Enter the Dragon at least has a subtlety about its soundtrack that makes it sound good, fitting each scene perfectly, which isn't at all like Dragon Ball Z, especially considering it's almost completely void of actual martial arts. Not to mention it has extremely long staring contests and power up scenes.

There's a few good pieces that I think are worth reuse, and they do (like this up until 2:13: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WrrxlReHpE), but when I hear shit like this over and over: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7nWOkQ9x14 all I can think of how it belongs in some B movie from 50 years ago. It just feels like it has a lack of depth. It's similar to how a lot of people feel certain songs from the 50s and 60s lack multidimensionality. Maybe it's the overuse of brass instruments that throws me off. Something like this, which is older than Dragon Ball, sounds so much more alive to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvOPEPQ11DY

[ABED]

Notorious amongst who?

all I can think of how it belongs in some B movie from 50 years ago.

First off, DB is kind of a B movie, and it seems like you are implying that older music sounds bad. So what if it sounds like something from the past? And lastly, Piccolo's theme is a great track. It fits Piccolo perfectly.

It's similar to how a lot of people feel certain songs from the 50s and 60s lack multidimensionality.

And many feel modern music is lacking.

[Sayo-chan]

Notorious amongst who?

all I can think of how it belongs in some B movie from 50 years ago.

First off, DB is kind of a B movie, and it seems like you are implying that older music sounds bad. So what if it sounds like something from the past? And lastly, Piccolo's theme is a great track. It fits Piccolo perfectly.

It's similar to how a lot of people feel certain songs from the 50s and 60s lack multidimensionality.

And many feel modern music is lacking.

It is when it feels cheap. It shouldn't sound that way, since I'm not implying that, and directly contradict that notion later in my post. The song I linked was from 1982, predating Dragon Ball, as I stated. There's nothing wrong if something sounds like "it's from the past". It's a matter of execution. Take Off the Wall for example. It sounds older based on the arrangement of the album (i.e. disco, late 70s funk, etc.). That in itself isn't a bad thing, because it doesn't sound cheap or lacking; it's full of substance. Dated typically has the negative connotation of sounding old and bad. I think Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" is the perfect example of this. When I stated some songs sound that way, it's because they do. The recording technology plays a huge factor in this, as well as the group involved. That's why there's not too much of a distinction in the early Beatles records. On the contrary, almost all of Elvis's early records at Sun (which predate the Beatles, obviously) sound distinct and multidimensional. In fact, compare his 50s work to his 70s work, the latter has a far larger probability of being lifeless.

Now with modern music, it's different. It can't feel dated yet (unless it's trying to be), so the dissatisfaction with it is entirely different. I'm mainly referring to modern American and British pop, because that's what people typically have a problem with. This is usually attributed to a lack of talent, dedication to actually being a musician or being a one-trick pony. In fact, those problems have always been around. Take the Monkees for example. They're perhaps the first manufactured boyband, which none of them could tolerate despite briefly holding popularity over the Beatles. I mean, compare Thriller to Invincible. The former is a masterpiece, whereas the latter is filled with whines, poor vocal work and an overall lack of substance and care put into the album. So no, I don't hold biases based on dates.

[Deathbringer]

There's a few good pieces that I think are worth reuse, and they do (like this up until 2:13: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3WrrxlReHpE), but when I hear shit like this over and over: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7nWOkQ9x14 all I can think of how it belongs in some B movie from 50 years ago. It just feels like it has a lack of depth. It's similar to how a lot of people feel certain songs from the 50s and 60s lack multidimensionality. Maybe it's the overuse of brass instruments that throws me off. Something like this, which is older than Dragon Ball, sounds so much more alive to me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvOPEPQ11DY

Those are 2 different genres though, the Cobra music you use there is a bit more lighthearted (it's really great music don't get me wrong there) but the Kuchiki music you've used isn't lighthearted for a comparison. I mean here's a more lighthearted (for about 43 seconds) sounding dragonball track that uses less instruments than the Cobra track but still has a lot of personality to it I think, in fact whenever I think of "dragonball music" this song plays in my head immediately: https://youtu.be/bRSNR6vw2wA

no one would have minded DBZ's original score had it just been there in the first place

THIS. THIS. THIS. I SWEAR TO GOD THIS. Sorry to shorten down what you fully said but that part really sticks out to me, I've seen people say that the replacement score fits the show better than the original but it really just sounds like they're only saying that because the version of the show they grew up with had that score and I do think to myself sometimes that the show would have been just as popular without replacing the score because the kids that watched it at the time just ate up whatever was put on screen for them including the many flaws that DBZ has as a show.

[Sayo-chan]

That sounds even worse than what I linked. I could've used a more serious song from the soundtrack, but it really wouldn't have made a difference in the point I was making. I think it's the way he/they arrange percussion with the brass instruments that makes me hate it so much.

I never liked the music in Dragon Ball, and I never cared for the Faulconer music in Z; although I would take it 9/10 times if I had to listen to either soundtrack individually (i.e. without the anime). Individually, the Johnson score was probably the best when segregated from the anime. So it's not nostalgia, and it really isn't for a lot of people. Generalizing people's tastes as nostalgia filled really doesn't get anyone anywhere. This has a similar feel to Z: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y6_T4W09zmI up until the part where it actually gets good, which is where it's primarily used in the anime. It's much more serious than the piece I provided earlier and sounds a lot more dimensional from 1:28 - 1:50 than most songs in the original Dragon Ball soundtrack. It's kind of like comparing Tevin Campell to Ariana Grande, the former has better execution 9/10.

[ABED]

I think it's the way he/they arrange percussion with the brass instruments that makes me hate it so much.

I'm not a musician, I have zero idea what this means, nor how it is somehow a negative. Do you have something against brass? What did you find wrong about the Piccolo theme?

Johnson's music is very bland and unmemorable.

[ABED]

It is when it feels cheap. It shouldn't sound that way, since I'm not implying that, and directly contradict that notion later in my post. The song I linked was from 1982, predating Dragon Ball, as I stated. There's nothing wrong if something sounds like "it's from the past". It's a matter of execution. Take Off the Wall for example. It sounds older based on the arrangement of the album (i.e. disco, late 70s funk, etc.). That in itself isn't a bad thing, because it doesn't sound cheap or lacking; it's full of substance. Dated typically has the negative connotation of sounding old and bad. I think Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" is the perfect example of this. When I stated some songs sound that way, it's because they do. The recording technology plays a huge factor in this, as well as the group involved. That's why there's not too much of a distinction in the early Beatles records. On the contrary, almost all of Elvis's early records at Sun (which predate the Beatles, obviously) sound distinct and multidimensional. In fact, compare his 50s work to his 70s work, the latter has a far larger probability of being lifeless.

Now with modern music, it's different. It can't feel dated yet (unless it's trying to be), so the dissatisfaction with it is entirely different. I'm mainly referring to modern American and British pop, because that's what people typically have a problem with. This is usually attributed to a lack of talent, dedication to actually being a musician or being a one-trick pony. In fact, those problems have always been around. Take the Monkees for example. They're perhaps the first manufactured boyband, which none of them could tolerate despite briefly holding popularity over the Beatles. I mean, compare Thriller to Invincible. The former is a masterpiece, whereas the latter is filled with whines, poor vocal work and an overall lack of substance and care put into the album. So no, I don't hold biases based on dates.

The recording equipment is separate from the songs. The Beatles albums were produced on older machines, but the music itself is great. I'm not arguing multidimensionality, just whether it's good and it fits and is distinct. You keep using words like "substance" and "multidimensional" but you don't at all convey what is meant by that and simply assume we understand. In what way does Kikuchi's work lack dimension?

The problem isn't being dated, all music eventually becomes dated, the issue is whether it's good or not.

So no, I don't hold biases based on dates.

Yeah, which is exactly why you keep talking about something being "dated". It should also be noted that the animation is also older.

The song you linked to sounds awful. Predated or not, it's just uninteresting to me. And what was wrong with Bing Crosby's White Christmas?

[Sayo-chan]

I'm not a musician, I have zero idea what this means, nor how it is somehow a negative. Do you have something against brass? What did you find wrong about the Piccolo theme?

Johnson's music is very bland and unmemorable.

Why would I have something against brass when I linked to a song I like that has brass instruments in it? I said it's how it's arranged. In the case of Piccolo's theme, it's the way they use the french horn with the drums, it bothers me. It's a very bland mixture that lacks any sort of depth to it. It's also very jarring. Quiet, loud, quiet, loud, etc.

How is it "unmemborable"? Plenty of people remember it, and I know I'm not the only one that prefers it on a standalone basis. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaANU4km_cs Once the brass and percussion kicks it up around four minutes, it's the complete opposite of bland. The beginning is eerie and actually bares resemblance to the waterphone stuff you'd hear in a horror movie, which I think is neat.

The recording equipment is separate from the songs. The Beatles albums were produced on older machines, but the music itself is great. I'm not arguing multidimensionality, just whether it's good and it fits and is distinct. You keep using words like "substance" but you don't at all convey what is meant by that. In what way?

The problem isn't being dated, all music eventually becomes dated, the issue is whether it's good or not.

No, it isn't. Back in the 50s the studio standard was a 2-tracking recording machine. This automatically limits the quality and layering of the music. Most people do complain about their early records suffering from the pitfalls of this technology, alongside their inability to diversify their music. This is why their first six or so singles don't stand out. Substance is the opposite of boring, it's essentially something solid, well executed, not under or overwhelming. The problem with the original score is how most of the pieces lack diversity, it's so repetitive and underwhelming. The Faulconer music while diverse, often suffers from being overwhelming and too synthetic.

The problem isn't being dated, all music eventually becomes dated, the issue is whether it's good or not.

Again, you're entirely focusing on the denotation. I already defined the connotation of dated I'm adhering to, it's merely a specific type of bad.

Yeah, which is exactly why you keep talking about something being "dated".

Never mind the fact I completely defined what I meant by it. Never mind the fact I went into a long explanation about how I prefer many older albums and how some are better than newer albums. Never mind the fact I've provided an analysis of the problems with music in general as opposed to asserting one over the other.

The song you linked to sounds awful. Predated or not, it's just uninteresting to me. And what was wrong with Bing Crosby's White Christmas.

It's like you're not reading my text in order. Predated is only relevant to the fact I said I preferred something older over something I stated was dated, which should tell you the point I'm making has nothing to do with being biased. But you keep harping off on irrelevant tangents. There's nothing awful about the time stamp I gave. It's cohesive and played flawlessly with a smooth but hectic arrangement. Its juxtaposition makes it anything but awful. Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" is about as dull as popular music can possibly be. He has a limited octave range that makes the entire song sound next to monotone. Listen to Frank Sinatra's rendition, it has more of an oomph to it.

[ABED]

First off, I'm not a musician, so take that into account with your responses, and second, it's like you are using some background in music to imply that you are making an objective assessment.

Specifically, that Piccolo theme stands out, it's very memorable. It stands out and says, "this guy is dangerous, don't mess with him." Plus there are a number of different versions of the theme depending on the mood. Sometimes it's more slow and ominous, sometimes it's more energetic to fit the kinetic action sequence.

"Plenty of people remember it" Despite having seen the dub numerous times, I can't remember a single song from Johnson's score. It's bland. Nothing about that sticks out to me.

that lacks any sort of depth to it

What does that mean?

I already defined the connotation of dated I'm adhering to, it's merely a specific type of bad.

Then argue that it's bad, not whether something was from a long time ago because it's not that relevant to the issue at hand.

It's cohesive and played flawlessly with a smooth but hectic arrangement.

You like it, fine. I don't. Using music terminology doesn't make your argument more credible as we're discussing subjective preference.

White Christmas isn't a song that has a lot of oomph to it. It's a sweet mellow song.

Most people do complain about their early records suffering from the pitfalls of this technology, alongside their inability to diversify their music.

Who are "most people". Lots of people love those early Beatles songs. They were big hits.

The problem with the original score is how most of the pieces lack diversity, it's so repetitive and underwhelming.

The songs sound very different from each other. There's a commonality, sure, but Upa's theme sounds nothing like either Piccolo's theme or the song that plays when we first meet Gohan.

[Sayo-chan]

First off, I'm not a musician, so take that into account with your responses, and second, it's like you are using some background in music to imply that you are making an objective assessment.

I'm starting to become tired of this. I'm having to outwardly say I'm not meaning things I'm not at all saying or implying. I've made no overall objective assessment, you can't. It's objective that there's an arrangement of french horns and percussion instruments that repeats itself. It's objective I don't like that. It's not objective it's bad, because bad is a qualifier subject to preference.

Specifically, that Piccolo theme stands out, it's very memorable. It stands out and says, "this guy is dangerous, don't mess with him." Plus there are a number of different versions of the theme depending on the mood. Sometimes it's more slow and ominous, sometimes it's more energetic to fit the kinetic action sequence.

Memorable. This doesn't mean anything unless you show it's quantifiable in some way. Who remembers it? You? Then what you're saying is redundant. Many people? Okay, show me. You show me. Then it just becomes an appeal to population.

I don't see how it stands out. Aside from the middle part I like that marked the transition, it hardly differs from the rest of the soundtrack's arrangement. If by different versions, you mean too much of the same thing, I agree.

"Plenty of people remember it" Despite having seen the dub numerous times, I can't remember a single song from Johnson's score. It's bland. Nothing about that sticks out to me.

So you represent everyone? I know you won't agree with that statement. You shouldn't. Just because you don't remember it, doesn't mean it's not memorable. Memorable isn't really an argument in favor of anything beyond an appeal to population. If nothing sticks out to you, then you didn't listen to it, because the music literally jumps at the time stamps I gave you. It changes tone, that has to stick out to anyone that can hear it. Not liking it something else entirely.

What does that mean?

It means it lacks multidimensionality because it has too much repetition. This to me is what makes it underwhelming.

Then argue that it's bad, not whether something was from a long time ago because it's not that relevant to the issue at hand.

No. I already explained that it's a way to specify a certain trait of being "bad". It's dated, which has a negative connotation that I've provided.

It's cohesive and played flawlessly with a smooth but hectic arrangement.
You like it, fine. I don't. Using music terminology doesn't make your argument more credible as we're discussing subjective preference.

I'm not using any esoteric terms. Arrangement is a relatively simple world that most people have an understanding of. Arguing against my lexical choices isn't an argument against what I'm saying. It is cohesive of how it's articulated. It builds up on itself until it hits a climax, building itself down back the way it started. It's not like I'm giving you time measures or anything like that. The instruments aren't sloppy, they're played well, that's also not anything specific to music terminology. It's just saying the musicians are competent. The music is smooth the way it slides, but it's also hectic due to its pickup as the tone shifts in the middle, which is what I stated I liked. You don't bother to explain why something's awful, you just say it is, but when I explain why I like something, my words somehow discredit my arguments for being too specific? That makes no sense. If you have trouble understanding, why don't you just look them up? I've been telling you what I mean every time you ask. I've hardly gone depth on the intrinsics of an orchestra.

White Christmas isn't a song that has a lot of oomph to it. It's a sweet mellow song.

Nothing says it has to be. And there's such a thing as too mellow. He sounds montoned and has a very limited range, physiologically he's vocally limited. His falsetto is also terrible due to how inconsistent and hollow it is, which is saying something due to how breathless falsetto already is.

Who are "most people". Lots of people love those early Beatles songs. They were big hits.

The first six singles were not big hits. Lots of people love all types of music, however one-dimensional, trite and repetitive it is. I'm not making an appeal to authority here, I'm making a point that people have other opinions and they're not automatically disqualified because of a consensus, especially one that doesn't exist.

The songs sound very different from each other. There's a commonality, sure, but Upa's theme sounds nothing like either Piccolo's theme or the song that plays when we first meet Gohan.

Notice how I stated earlier that some songs sound good and should be used? There are exceptions, but those exceptions are not the rules. I feel like even if I did a play by play of each song, which would take forever, you'd just attack the fact I'm specifying, which still doesn't make sense.

[ABED]

I feel like even if I did a play by play of each song, which would take forever, you'd just attack the fact I'm specifying, which still doesn't make sense.

It's like you are arguing with yourself, I'm not even sure what you mean by this. Why would I attack you for specifying? I don't care if you do a play by play of which songs are good or bad, it's a subjective assessment.

Memorable. This doesn't mean anything unless you show it's quantifiable in some way. Who remembers it? You? Then what you're saying is redundant. Many people? Okay, show me. You show me. Then it just becomes an appeal to population.

Is that any different than any similar statement I've made? You make statements like "most people"... and that's fine, you feel no need to prove that statement, but I say something in a similar vein and I'm supposed to come with some proof? Okay, I'm basing it on my assessment from how long I've been around the fandom and how Johnson's work is essentially a footnote. Either it's about the Kikuchi score or Faulconer's score. Most of what I've seen about Johnson's score is that either they don't really remember it, think it's okay, but nothing special or just didn't listen to it. The overwhelming majority of discussion is centered around the original or Faulconer score. I'll grant you that the internet isn't exactly a representative sample, but I still think you can get a fairly good grasp of what people are thinking if you look in numerous places (e.g. these forums, youtube, facebook pages).

I don't see how it stands out. Aside from the middle part I like that marked the transition, it hardly differs from the rest of the soundtrack's arrangement.

I have ZERO idea what that means. If you can't see how Piccolo's theme differs from something like Upa's theme, I don't know what to say. One's more somber, the other one conveys completely different emotions, and uses very different instruments.

If nothing sticks out to you, then you didn't listen to it, because the music literally jumps at the time stamps I gave you.

That's not true, I haven't seen Jurassic Park in years but I can remember that theme.

Arrangement is a relatively simple world that most people have an understanding of.

I know what arrange means, I don't know what it means in a musical context, so please stop assuming that everyone knows exactly what you mean because it's not true that most people have an understanding of it. It's not something people talk about in everyday conversation.

And there's such a thing as too mellow.

Subjective

He sounds montoned and has a very limited range

But the range fits the song. It doesn't matter how limited his range is if it fits the music he's singing. Michael Cera seems to have a limited range, but it fits those characters, just like Kevin Costner fit his character in Field of Dreams.

The first six singles were not big hits.

She love you and I want hold your hand were big hits. Several of them went to number one.

[Sayo-chan]

It's like you are arguing with yourself, I'm not even sure what you mean by this. Why would I attack you for specifying? I don't care if you do a play by play of which songs are good or bad, it's a subjective assessment.

Except I'm not? You're criticising my specifications as opposed to what they're about

Is that any different than any similar statement I've made?

Yes...? You haven't made a statement even remotely comparable. If you did, it wouldn't make sense for you to have said what I replied to in the first place.

I have ZERO idea what that means. If you can't see how Piccolo's theme differs from something like Upa's theme, I don't know what to say. One's more somber, the other one conveys completely different emotions, and uses very different instruments.

I pointed out part of the theme I liked at first, I stated everything before and after is very similar to the way most of the rest of the soundtrack is arranged. I never compared either of those two, but it feels as lifeless as the other one.

That's not true, I haven't seen Jurassic Park in years but I can remember that theme.

What does Jurassic Park have to do with the time stamp I gave you, and the music picking up?

I know what arrange means, I don't know what it means in a musical context, so please stop assuming that everyone knows exactly what you mean because it's not true that most people have an understanding of it. It's not something people talk about in everyday conversation.

A musical arrangement is a simple concept most people understand. You don't have to know the inner workings of it to understand what I'm talking about, because I'm not going that far into detail.

Subjective

Which is what I stated in the first sentence of my last post. What's your point?

But the range fits the song. It doesn't matter how limited his range is if it fits the music he's singing. Michael Cera seems to have a limited range, but it fits those characters, just like Kevin Costner fit his character in Field of Dreams.

If the song is supposed to be monotoned and incredibly dull, sure. Sinatra and Presley have a much more lively versions, probably because they're more vocally empowered.

]She love you and I want hold your hand were big hits. Several of them went to number one.

Neither of those are in the first six of their singles. You also count the B-side to each record.

[ABED]

A musical arrangement is a simple concept most people understand. You don't have to know the inner working of it to understand what I'm talking about, because I'm not going that far into detail.

Most people CAN understand it, and I'm definitely capable but I'm a layman and I think most people (based on experience) talk about music in terms of emotions not arrangements unless they have some musical background.

You haven't made a statement even remotely comparable

Easy statement to make when you just disregard any statement you disagree with.

Regarding the Beatles singles, what were their first singles, everything I'm reading says those songs were amongst their earliest singles.

What does Jurassic Park have to do with the time stamp I gave you, and the music picking up?

Literally nothing because you misunderstood what I was replying to. I was pointing out that just because I listen to something doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to remember it. I've seen DB's dub more recently than JP, but I can remember JP's score because it's a classic. I can't remember every song I ever listened to even with bands that I like. I love Metallica, and have listened to their albums all the way through, but not everything sticks out to me. Nothing about that song stuck out to me as memorable in spite of me having listened to them several times all the way through. I remember it picking up, but not what it sounded like.

If the song is supposed to be monotoned and incredibly dull, sure. Sinatra and Elvis have a much more lively version, probably because they're more vocally empowered.

They are simply different versions of a good song. I have preferences, but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy multiple versions of the same song. I know I sound like a broken record but it's dull TO YOU.

[Cure Dragon 255]

I agree with both of you, Cobra is way more spicy and entertaining musically especially the opening,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELAy66C_Ljc



but you seem to think almost everyone disliked (Or at least state too quickly) Kikuchi Sayo Chan and that its objectively dull and boring. What about the millions of people in Europe and Latin America who loved the soundtrack and didnt need any replacement? Sure its true, its kind of dull but its good music and people can very much dislike it, but its not all that awful.

[Sayo-chan]

I agree with both of you, Cobra is way more spicy and entertaining musically especially the opening,


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELAy66C_Ljc



but you seem to think almost everyone disliked (Or at least state too quickly) Kikuchi Sayo Chan and that its objectively dull and boring. What about the millions of people in Europe and Latin America who loved the soundtrack and didnt need any replacement? Sure its true, its kind of dull but its good music and people can very much dislike it, but its not all that awful.

I don't recall saying everyone disliked it. I know I said I did. I also didn't say it was objectively boring, I made inferences that it's dull and boring based off certain things that are objective; it doesn't mean that the conclusion I came to is objective, because it isn't.

[Cure Dragon 255]

Ok, Then I apologize and join in the gushing of Cobra OST. So GORGEOUS!

Sorry for putting words in your mouth! Where is you avi from? So cute!

[ABED]

Maybe it's because I haven't seen Cobra, but I'm not digging the theme. It's sounds vaguely similar to the Lupin III theme, but I liked that one. Perhaps I would like it better if I saw the show, but as of now, I have little attachment to the music, whereas I love the DB opening themes. The first series' theme feels like it perfectly encapsulates the series.

[Cure Dragon 255]

Maybe we should just say "Different Strokes for Different Folks" and leave it at that.

EDIT:OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH! Makafushigi Adventure! I looooooooooooove that! It needs more love.