[Nicolai P. Zwar]

I don’t believe I ever argued that. I just said that LLL is “not a label for me”. It clearly is a label for most fans, since most fans prefer C&C.

Not directly, no, but the way you tend to belabor the point makes it at least appear that way at times. I’m all for anyone listening to music in any way they see fit, and the more people are able to listen to the music they want in the way they want, the better. And Labels like La-La Land are about as good at providing that as I can see would be possible.

A good example is THE FURY, which I just relistened to a couple of days ago. I had the original Varese release for many years, but then someone sent me the 2CD set that included both the OST and the film recording. I proceeded to SELL the old CD, since the OST was already in the set, and in remastered sound. I’ve regretted it ever since. I just want it to be an entity that contains the OST, nothing more, nothing less. I put it on, press play and let it play out. And when it’s over, that’s it. There’s nothing more to be had or be found anywhere on the disc. I find that more compelling.

See, that’s what I mean. THE FURY already gives you the original album on its own disc even, just like you said… you can press play, enjoy it, and never touch the second CD. So when the mere existence of additional material on a release becomes a complaint, it stops being about your listening habits and starts sounding like an objection to other people having options you don’t personally use. Since THE FURY allows you to already do exactly what you describe: put on the album disc, let it run, and call it a day. Nothing about the expanded set interferes with that. Which is why the complaint about the second disc comes across, intentionally or not, as something else entirely: not a matter of listening, but a matter of limiting what others get to hear.