When and how should sound be planned, from script reading onward, and what artefacts do practitioners say help (questions, memos, sounds played on set)?

Four planning artefacts are documented: (1) script-reading questions that pin down what a character hears and whether the setting has a voice (Thom 2000); (2) an early overall sound concept developed from the finished script (Davis on The Matrix, 1999); (3) designed sounds played on set so actors react (De Bont/Rydstrom on The Haunting, about 100 sounds, two months of prep); (4) a written sound memo that separates realistic source music from sparing underscoring (Welles, 1957-58). The sources also state the usual reality: sound people are typically brought on late, spotting is squeezed, and composer and sound crew rarely coordinate. Planning is therefore a documented best practice on some films, not the norm Weis reports. Curator correction 2026-10-23 (discovery audit record C3-B622-02; sources re-fetched 2026-10-23, excerpts re-located by curator GET): Problem. C3-B054-G19-07 lists four planning artefacts and says sound people are 'typically brought on late', spotting is squeezed and composer and sound crew 'rarely coordinate', as 'Weis reports'. Audit result (cited pages re-fetched and searched whole-document). (a) Supported: The Haunting article says Rydstrom had two months to prepare, 'an unusually long time', against sound being viewed as the last and hastiest element; De Bont operated a digital audio player and used about 100 of Rydstrom's sounds on set to inspire and surprise the actors. (a) The Matrix interview: Davis says the Wachowskis had a finished script which they read and 'we developed an overall concept for its sound design'. (a) Welles's sound memo to Murch separates realistic 'background music' from sparingly used 'underscoring'; the page dates it 1958 (the original said 1957-58). (c)/(d) Not supported by the cited pages: the Thom (2000) script-reading questions (no Thom article is among the cited URLs; 'Thom' appears only in site navigation), the statements that spotting is squeezed and that composer and sound crew rarely coordinate, and the attribution to Weis. The nearest cited support for the 'late' claim is the single phrase in The Haunting article, which is one journalist's remark, not a survey. Method. Keep the three supported artefacts, attribute the 'late hiring' remark only to the Haunting article, and drop or re-source the Thom and Weis parts. Limitations. Each artefact is one film's anecdote (1958, 1999); none is a measured practice. Version/date. Re-fetched 2026-10-23. Curator qualifications: All excerpts located; early-planning ideal vs reported practice (different projects/decades) kept. Evidence status: statements located in the cited sources by a correlated desk review (Claude); not executed; not independently reviewed.

{
  "citations": [
    {
      "url": "https://www.filmsound.org/randythom/whatliesbeneath.htm",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.filmsound.org/articles/haunting/haunting.htm",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.filmsound.org/editorsnet/matrix1.htm",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.filmsound.org/murch/evil/",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.filmsound.org/synctanks/",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    },
    {
      "url": "https://www.filmsound.org/articles/roles_of_sound.htm",
      "note": "candidate evidence excerpts"
    }
  ]
}