Greatest Film Composer Tournament

[Uni 306]

Checked the main page to see if there was anything new on the Matessino material, and saw the blurb about this bracket tournament:

http://consequenceofsound.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/composerbracket2v2.jpg

Fun idea, but . . . don't know if they went about this the best way. First off, Horner's not even on the chart. I know not everyone's a huge fan—and I certainly understand the reasons for that—but c'mon . . . a "serious" tournament that features Jon Brion but leaves out James Horner? Please.

Also, they should've put Goldsmith somewhere on the right side. Williams is in prime position to make it to the finals, where he should've faced off against his biggest competition. The Turtleneck vs. the Ponytail. Now everything's pretty much a downhill run for the Maestro.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Neat idea, awful match-ups/choices. Trent Reznor with all two of his film scores?

[KK 3,307]

Neat idea, awful match-ups/choices. Trent Reznor with all two of his film scores?

Exactly what I was thinking!

Two film scores by a popular artist suddenly puts him above veterans like Horner?

[Uni 306]

Glad to see I wasn't alone in noticing that. Also, in the next round they'll have six semifinalists that they'll have to whittle down to four. They couldn't think of eight other composers to round off this thing? No Silvestri? No Poledouris? No room for Shire, Conti, Jarre, Desplat, Kamen, Hisaishi, Powell, Ottman, Rosenman, Doyle? No Tangerine Dream, fercryinoutloud?!

We oughta show 'em how it's done. Put together a bracket of our own . . . although the question then would be whether to include JW or not (since what are the chances he wouldn't take the crown?). Maybe we could make him the honorary overseer, or something.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I nominate Blume to design our bracket.

[Wojo 2,453]

Everybody pick and rank your top 64 film composers (I can't even name that many). Each artist's average score determines their seeding, and then let the tournament begin.

It would be neat if the scoring could be mathematically quantifiable, like counting how many scores by each artist everyone has, but my collection is too cluttered to accurately count them.

[chuck 154]

No surprise Johnny defeated Gorgeous, but still... The last two left standing should've been the both of them.

[Uni 306]

The more I think on it, the more I wonder whether "design" might be the problem. Do you pit the big guys against each other early on (as they did), or do you spread them out, knowing that they'll all still be standing at the end? Maybe a completely random spread would be both more fair and more interesting.

What is required is a minimum of 32 composers . . . though I gotta say that 64 would be a helluva lot of fun to play through. Let some of the obscure guys (and gals) play too. Why not? (The one great thing about what Consequence of Sound did with theirs was to post a very short endorsement of each artist and a clip from one of their scores. That way people who don't know the composer can make a choice based on something, at least.)

It could take a while, but the World Cup takes a few years to qualify its field, so. . . .

WAITAMINUTE! Hah! That's it! Why not make it more fun (and egregiously more complicated!)? We could do a "World Cup" of film scores! Instead of pitting composers against each other based on their entire repertoire, each one could be represented by one of their scores. That would essentially be the "game" they're bringing to the field. (Even Williams doesn't play a top-flight match every time, right?) The bracket could follow the same pattern, too—start with group play at the 32-composer field, with the top two from each group slated against the top two from another group until it's down to 16, and then it's March Madness from there.

The trouble with going straight-up composer against composer is that you can really only play once (or once every five or ten years, like Joey's Best of JW vote). And you know who the Final Four will be, and which winner will doubtless emerge from there. But the beauty of this approach is that we could hold a potentially endless series of tournaments, inserting different scores each time—especially if we could figure a way to make the selection of scores random. A skilled composer like JW or Goldsmith has a better shot at winning, since they have more great scores than most other composers . . . but y'never know when a John Goldfarb Please Come Home might wind up facing a dark horse like The Last Starfighter or something. Upsets could happen at any time. You'd be cheering for your favorite musician, but there'd be no guarantee he (or she) would last all the way to the end.

And before you say it—yes, I'm giving this entirely too much thought. But quiet afternoons like this were made for such sparks of imaginative fun, yes?

[SafeUnderHill 205]

[Uni 306]

We'd probably do it much like the Best of Williams vote—posting your choices in a specific thread, with someone tabulating the results. (I don't know if the polling option on the site would be far-reaching enough to cover the first couple of rounds.)

On second thought, the World Cup-style thing would probably take half of forever; the qualifying rounds alone would take a month. On the other hand, a straight-64 set would take 6 weeks to play out to the end; a 32-set would take 5 (if we left the polls open one week for each round). But here's the trick: each composer's score changes each round, just like a team's quality of play might vary from one match to the next, right? So you're seeing a variety of choices each week, and you never know which scores will be facing off against each other. I think that would make it a source of ongoing fun.

[Wojo 2,453]

So does each poster pick a composer, and play as the coach, to then select a different score for each "match?"

[Uni 306]

That would require between 32 and 64 "coaches"—probably out of reach for this place. (And, of course, everyone would be fighting to coach one of the big names, and whoever got stuck with someone like Reznor would be pissed.)

Again, it would probably be better to figure out a way to randomly select scores for each round. That way everyone—including the organizer(s)—would be able to play along, and be just as surprised at the choices and outcomes.

Everybody pick and rank your top 64 film composers (I can't even name that many). Each artist's average score determines their seeding, and then let the tournament begin.

I actually like this idea. Or we could agree on the top 40-50 composers, and then have a vote-off to see who gets to round out the rest of the bracket.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Who the fuck is Brion? Apparently he's a worse film composer than Trent Reznor.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Never heard of Jon Brion? Did a couple of Kauffman's films.

[indy4 155]

How does one vote?

Yeah, I can't figure it out either...

Here's my prediction

Williams beat Herrmann

Vangelis beats Carpenter

Reznor beats Glass

Morricone beats Shore

Elfman beats Bernstein

Rota beats Mansell

Williams beats Vangelis

Rota beats Reznor

Morricone beats Elfman

Williams beats Morricone

Williams beats Rota

I think I got that straight...

[Incanus 5,714]

How does one vote?

Yeah, I can't figure it out either...

Here's my prediction

Williams beat Herrmann

Vangelis beats Carpenter

Reznor beats Glass

Morricone beats Shore

Elfman beats Bernstein

Rota beats Mansell

Williams beats Vangelis

Rota beats Reznor

Morricone beats Elfman

Williams beats Morricone

Williams beats Rota

I think I got that straight...

Dinosaurs create Williams

Williams beats dinosaurs

Williams beats Man

Johnny shall inherit the Earth.

[Ricard 2,245]

Fun idea, but . . . don't know if they went about this the best way. First off, Horner's not even on the chart. I know not everyone's a huge fan—and I certainly understand the reasons for that—but c'mon . . . a "serious" tournament that features Jon Brion but leaves out James Horner? Please.

Blame the site's readers...

Last week, we asked you to submit three film composers worthy of being considered The Greatest. Your response, however, was total A-list. Despite the notable omissions of both Michael Kamen and James Horner, we were pretty floored at the collection of talent you chose to be involved in this month’s tournament bracket.

http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/06/whos-the-greatest-film-composer-of-all-time-round-one/

[Jonesy 55]

I'm surprised that Zimmer is not there.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Richard Penna 3,688]

Interesting. I wonder if he loses most of his appeal once you go inside the proper film score world.

[Jonesy 55]

I'm surprised that Zimmer is not there.

?

He is. He lost against Elfman.

My bad. I guess I didn't see him.

[mstrox 6,651]

I hate brackets in opinion matters, because there is always some unevenness in how you get to the end. My favorite method of ranking, which we used to do on a forum a few years back: in a place with a large group of participants, everybody ranks their top 25, in order from great to less great. First-place votes get 25 points, second-place votes get 24 points, etc all the way down to last-place votes only getting 1 point. Then you just add up the points, and the greatest composers are determined.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Uni 306]

How does one vote?

Yeah, I can't figure it out either...

Go to the current page at http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/06/whos-the-greatest-film-composer-of-all-time-round-two/. At the bottom there's a drop-down menu. If you want to go straight to the vote, go to page 8. If you want to read the little blurb and see the samples for each composer, go through each page.

Here's my prediction

Williams beat Herrmann

Vangelis beats Carpenter

Reznor beats Glass

Morricone beats Shore

Elfman beats Bernstein

Rota beats Mansell

Williams beats Vangelis

Rota beats Reznor

Morricone beats Elfman

Williams beats Morricone

Williams beats Rota

I think I got that straight...

Might as well save time and give it to Williams now. I doubt there'll be a lot of nuance in a page that includes Reznor but shut out Kamen and Horner.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

The dead guy in my avatar says a giant 'FUCK YOU!' to the readers of Inconsequence of Sound.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

I want to explore his concert music. Any recommendations on where to find recordings?

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Here's a list of his concert works. Sadly so little of it is available to on record.

Woodwind Trio for flute, clarinet, bassoon (1936)

Quest, symphonic suite for chamber orchestra (1937)

String Quartet (1939)

Concerto for piano and orchestra with trumpet obbligato (1939 - 1957)

Four Piano Preludes (1940)

Suite for piano and orchestra, two movements arranged for two pianos (1940)

Rhapsody for piano and orchestra (1941) - world premiere November 11, 1941, N.Y.C.

Cross Examine the Witness - Jazz (1941)

Woodwind Quintet (1942)

Holiday Set, for chamber orchestra (1945)

Morning Star, cantata for narrator, chorus and orchestra (1946) - Robert Montgomery; Lyn Murray Singers, October 28, 1946, N.Y.C.

Revue for clarinet and orchestra (1947) - Benny Goodman; Leonard Bernstein, City Symphony of NY, November 18, 1946, N.Y.C.

Negro Mother Cantata, for chorus and orchestra - Langston Hughes, text. (1947) May 18, 1947, N.Y.C.

Twelve Dance Preludes, seven performed by Joan Slessinger, Sept. 21 1947, Town Hall, NY

Symphony # 1 (1947)

3 Pieces for chamber orchestra (1950) - NY Chamber Orchestra, Hershey Kay, conductor. January 23, 1950, N.Y.C.

Symphonic suite from A Streetcar Named Desire (1951)

Symphonic suite from Death of a Salesman (1951) - arranged for the Philadelphia Orchestra

Symphonic suite from Viva Zapata! (1952)

http://alexnorthmusic.com/other_works.asp

One of the few I've been able to find.

http://www.allmusic.com/performance/concerto-for-piano-and-orchestra-with-trumpet-obbligato-mq0000637736

Here's thread on the subject at FSM, and a superb post as usual by WILLIAMDMCCRUM.

North is one of the most influential of American composers ever. His influence on film and TV and theatre work, his fairly socialist stance, his associations with the likes of Millar and Kazan, his great epic scores, his championing of jazz and black music etc. all make him a unique umbrella-maker for a host of eclectic American influences (and not just American, when you look at the references in his film work). Copland was never so all-inclusive as he.

His influence is so ubiquitous that people don't really notice it. Properly understood, his work has had as much effect on the American musical psyche as Copland, but the problem is that it's SO close up and all-pervading that people don't see its uniqueness any more.

The notion that he's somehow 'inaccessible' is mystifing to me. If you like Goldsmith in his BEST era, (which is very, very strangely getting sidetracked in the last, say, two years here, in favour of the later, blander scores), then why on earth would you not like North?

A chat with Naxos might be a starting point.

http://filmscoremonthly.com/board/posts.cfm?threadID=77917&forumID=1&archive=0

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Yes... come on Naxos. North and Williams' unrecorded stuff. Get on it.

[indy4 155]

How does one vote?

Yeah, I can't figure it out either...

Go to the current page at http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/06/whos-the-greatest-film-composer-of-all-time-round-two/. At the bottom there's a drop-down menu. If you want to go straight to the vote, go to page 8. If you want to read the little blurb and see the samples for each composer, go through each page.

Here's my prediction

Williams beat Herrmann

Vangelis beats Carpenter

Reznor beats Glass

Morricone beats Shore

Elfman beats Bernstein

Rota beats Mansell

Williams beats Vangelis

Rota beats Reznor

Morricone beats Elfman

Williams beats Morricone

Williams beats Rota

I think I got that straight...

Might as well save time and give it to Williams now. I doubt there'll be a lot of nuance in a page that includes Reznor but shut out Kamen and Horner.

I don't know the type of people that read this particular site - but I could see Morricone giving Williams a challenge. But yeah, other than that it's easily Williams' to lose.

[Uni 306]

The dead guy in my avatar says a giant 'FUCK YOU!' to the readers of Inconsequence of Sound.

I don't know the type of people that read this particular site - but I could see Morricone giving Williams a challenge. But yeah, other than that it's easily Williams' to lose.

The type of people who read that particular site couldn't give space to the likes of North or Rózsa. They were too busy making room for John Carpenter and Wendy Carlos. I doubt they could begin to fathom the nuances that would make Morricone/Williams a genuinely interesting matchup. Williams will win, 'cause he's da guy that did that whole Star Wars thing, y'know?

Again, it makes me wonder what an in-depth score-against-score tournament would look like in a place like this. At the very least, I have to think it would inspire some good debate by people who know what the hell they're talking about.

[Gnome in Plaid 219]

I'm expecting a Reznor Vs. Mansell semi-final. Whoever wins, we lose.

As soon as I get 1000 posts, I'm changing my member title to "Part-Time Mansell Apologist."

Who the fuck is Brion? Apparently he's a worse film composer than Trent Reznor.

He's nothing particularly special. Synecdoche, New York was decent, but nothing else he's done has been very good.

I hate brackets in opinion matters, because there is always some unevenness in how you get to the end. My favorite method of ranking, which we used to do on a forum a few years back: in a place with a large group of participants, everybody ranks their top 25, in order from great to less great. First-place votes get 25 points, second-place votes get 24 points, etc all the way down to last-place votes only getting 1 point. Then you just add up the points, and the greatest composers are determined.

We should do something like that here.

Might as well save time and give it to Williams now. I doubt there'll be a lot of nuance in a page that includes Reznor but shut out Kamen and Horner.

Includes Reznor but shut out Kamen, Horner, Giacchino, Broughton, Kilar, Beltrami, Silvestri, Goldenthal, Tetaz, Zarvos, Young, Beal, and Isham.

That would require between 32 and 64 "coaches"—probably out of reach for this place. (And, of course, everyone would be fighting to coach one of the big names, and whoever got stuck with someone like Reznor would be pissed.)

Again, it would probably be better to figure out a way to randomly select scores for each round. That way everyone—including the organizer(s)—would be able to play along, and be just as surprised at the choices and outcomes.

Everybody pick and rank your top 64 film composers (I can't even name that many). Each artist's average score determines their seeding, and then let the tournament begin.

I actually like this idea. Or we could agree on the top 40-50 composers, and then have a vote-off to see who gets to round out the rest of the bracket.

For Your Consideration, 64 film composers. There are several names on the list that either haven't done much or I even actively dislike, but I'm not familiar enough with older or foreign composers to make a list that's more representative of real quality. In alphabetical order:

Angelo Badalamenti

Klaus Badelt

John Barry

Jeff Beal

Marco Beltrami

Elmer Bernstein

Jon Brion

Bruce Broughton

Carter Burwell

John Corigliano

John Debney

Alexandre Desplat

Patrick Doyle

Anne Dudley

Danny Elfman

Nima Fakhrara

Allyn Ferguson

Michael Giacchino

Philip Glass

Elliot Goldenthal

Jerry Goldsmith

Miles Goodman

Jeff Grace

Jonny Greenwood

Harry Gregson-Williams

Dave Grusin

Bernard Herrmann

James Horner

Mark Isham

Maurice Jarre

Johann Johannsson

Michael Kamen

Yoshihiro Kanno

Wojciech Kilar

Erich Korngold

Henry Mancini

Hummie Mann

Clint Mansell

Heather McIntosh

Ennio Morricone

Alfred Newman

Thomas Newman

James Newton Howard

Alex North

Basil Poledouris

John Powell

Leonard Rosenman

William Ross

Nino Rota

Ryuichi Sakamoto

Lalo Schifrin

Howard Shore

Clinton Shorter

Alan Silvestri

Francois Tetaz

Brian Tyler

Vangelis

John Williams

Austin Wintory

Christopher Young

Marcelo Zarvos

Hans Zimmer

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Gnome in Plaid 219]

I'm expecting a Reznor Vs. Mansell semi-final. Whoever wins, we lose.

As soon as I get 1000 posts, I'm changing my member title to "Part-Time Mansell Apologist."

Let's hope you won't reach this postcount... For both our sakes!

Eesh... no love for Sahara even?

To get the count up to 68, I'll add David Arnold, Charles Bernstein, Debbie Wiseman, and Jeremy Zuckerman to the mix. Any other suggestions?

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Joe Hisaishi

Lorne Balfe

Steve Jablonsky

Ramin Djawadi

Geoff Zanelli

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Eesh... no love for Sahara even?

Sahara is a fun score, yeah, and Mansell is an OK composer (for the most part), but does he deserve to be in that tournament? Hell no!

And is he good enough to deserve a part-time apologist? I don't think so! I guess it's still better than a full-time apologist, though.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Mansell is a great composer.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Koray Savas 2,251]

And where did I say that?

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Gnome in Plaid 219]

Well, you suggested them for JWFAN's tournament. Surely, you would not have done that if you thought they were meh!

I put some in my list I can't stand; I just needed to fill out a full bracket.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

Well, if you're going to do that, you might as well add MI83, JunkieXL and DrugAddict47.

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Don't forget Air, Tangerine Dream and Peter Gabriel.

[Uni 306]

For Your Consideration, 64 film composers. There are several names on the list that either haven't done much or I even actively dislike, but I'm not familiar enough with older or foreign composers to make a list that's more representative of real quality. In alphabetical order:

Nah . . . this is overkill. Better to have everyone list 20-30 (no more than 32) of their favorite composers. We'd get a wide enough range of composers from people that it wouldn't be hard to get to 64. If everyone puts in 64, we'll wind up with 300 and have to winnow the list down.

That's where the seeding would come from, too--the composer with the most submission votes ranks first, etc.

I put some in my list I can't stand; I just needed to fill out a full bracket.

That doesn't make any sense. Why include composers people can't stand? They'd all fall out in a pointless first round anyway.

I've been giving this further thought. It wouldn't be that hard to put together. Maybe a week of prep time (getting the rules finalized and posted--probably in a sticky thread), having everyone submit their lists, then bracketing it up, choosing the scores for the first round, and off we go.

[Gnome in Plaid 219]

That doesn't make any sense. Why include composers people can't stand? They'd all fall out in a pointless first round anyway.

The problem with that is that there are more than 32 legitimately really good composers.

[Uni 306]

Of course there are. You're not understanding what I'm saying. Take, for instance, an example where 10 people submitted a list of 32 composers. Some would be the same--we'd doubtless see JW, Goldsmith, Horner, and the like on every list--but many would be different. People would probably have to wrestle a bit to keep their list down to 32, but they'd all be composers they wanted to see in the bracket. In the end, from those 10 submissions, we'd get a total range of at least 64 composers, and probably a lot more than that, all of whom would be favored by someone (since someone submitted their name). We'd get to the final list--and seeding as well--by allowing the top 64 vote-getters into the first tournament. The leftovers who don't make it can be in a "waiting pool" until the next tournament; then they'd take the place of the composers who fall out earliest from the first tournament.

If people couldn't come up with 32, they'd be welcome to submit any number lower than that. If someone only submitted 10 names, those ten composers would just get more votes for better seeding.

But there's no point to sticking in the names of composers nobody likes listening to. It won't be that hard to fill a bracket. There are, after all, at least 64 legitimately good film composers out there.

[Ricard 2,245]

Round three: Morricone vs. Elfman, Williams vs. Vangelis, and Rota vs. Glass.

http://consequenceofsound.net/2014/06/whos-the-greatest-film-composer-of-all-time-round-three/

[Uni 306]

USA had a better chance of winning the World Cup outright than Vangelis does here. . . .

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Williams and Horner are the two best composers alive sorry Ennio.

[Ricard 2,245]

And the winner is...