[…] I want a given project to be an opportunity to contribute something powerful symbolically, something that’s both sonically and visually strong, regardless of how it interacts with another thing I’m working on. I want the coherence to come from quality, not from anything else. That’s really where I’m at. It’s become a sort of obsession. […]

[…] It’s my job to try and understand what you mean. But honestly, the two most problematic words in my experience are “rhythm” and “intensity.” “Rhythm” is tricky. For some people, it means percussive sounds. For others, it’s about tempo or pace. It can also refer to the density of notes(…) Or it might mean how the tempo evolves over time. When someone says they want more rhythm, they might mean they want it to go faster. There are just so many ways to interpret it. And “intensity” is a very cultural thing. I had a moment early on (…) when the designer kept asking for more intensity. I kept adding sounds, layer after layer, thinking I was getting closer. I eventually asked me to show me a point in my existing version which felt intense to him, and he pointed out a moment which was almost silent. I eventually realized that for him, intensity meant suspense. That taught me a lot. […]