Ludwig

Thanks to both for the kind comments. Filmmusic, to answer your question, I think there is a difference between bvi and #v, and it has to do with context. The reason I say the opening of the Imperial March is bvi is that the bass goes from ^1 to ^6. If we were to hear the minor chord there as #v, that would mean hearing the bass note as #^5. But since b^6 is a scale note, I think that is our first impression of the chord. And no tonic-dominant progression goes from ^1 to ^6 in the bass. It's only when we hear the bass of the distorted #iv going up a whole tone that we can now hear the bvi chord as #v. Then that leads into the riff again, so now we hear the bvi as a distorted dominant. In the case of the Ark Theme, it may not matter what label you use. If we don't hear harmonic functions of tonic, dominant, and subdominant in the passage, there would seem to be no difference between labels. The whole theme is constructed out of minor chords that are chromatically related, so maybe it's the interval relating them that's more important, or the number of fifths that separates their keys.

What makes the Imperial March so evil sounding? Here are my thoughts: http://www.filmmusicnotes.com/john-williams-themes-part-3-of-6-the-imperial-march-darth-vaders-theme/ At one point in the analysis, I actually transpose some of the recording to show how Williams used distorted chord progressions. See what you think...

Well, you get the same answer if you say it's a Lydian II or a certain type of secondary mixture, but I think they are different in concept, and that makes a difference to the way we perceive it. Calling it Lydian II emphasizes that the scale is the same as major but with a raised ^4. Secondary mixture makes it sound like the point was to turn a minor triad into a major one, which has to do with the chord and not the scale. Personally, I feel that these chords in Williams are usually best thought of as the Lydian II because they usually don't go to V. But of course as soon as I say this, you pull out an excellent example to the contrary - well done! When I analyze harmony, I always try to think of it in the larger context. So on the one hand, yes the 2nd chord does go to V, so it could be thought of as V/V just hearing those two chords. But then I think of the rest of the film, and most of the time, that 2nd chord just goes right back to I, so is more of a Lydian II. When we hear it in the big flying theme, we've been primed to hear it as a Lydian chord, but then of course it goes to V, taking the chord in a new direction. This is probably one of those things where we starts off hearing it as one chord (the Lydian II) then we retrospectively hear it as a different chord (V/V) based on what follows. Regarding it as only a Lydian II or only a V/V I think does not quite capture the way we hear it based on how it fits into the film as a whole. I'd probably analyze it as "Lydian II --> V/V", the arrow meaning that it becomes the second chord.

What books are you looking at in particular? In Aldwell & Schachter, they regard a D major chord in C major as being a II# chord, an instance of what they call "secondary mixture", so not exactly Lydian, but not a double dominant either. Their definition of secondary mixture is "the alteration of the 3rd of a triad where such alteration does not result from normal mixture." I have to say I've always disliked this term because it doesn't tell you what it is, only what it isn't. To quote from the British comedy series, Blackadder, it's a bit like Baldrick's definition of "dog" being "not a cat".

As you know, I'm a big fan of considering harmony in terms of tonic, dominant, or subdominant function. If we call the A chord V/V, that changes it from dominant to subdominant if G is our substitute tonic. Maybe if we heard it going from A to D to G, we could more easily hear it as subdominant. Is there a spot you had in mind for the chain you mentioned?

It depends on how it resolves. If it goes to V, then it's obviously V/V. But it's when it goes to something else like I, VI (as here), or even IV (as in Superman's flying theme) that it would best be considered a #II borrowed from the Lydian mode.

Nicely done to point to hymnal passages since we usually think of hymns as mainly strings of chords. But there always is the voice leading and therefore a melodic structure as well. The question is whether they are as important as the harmony in these passages. Take the Ark Theme from Raiders, for example. It's a great little theme based on various minor chords strung together. So you could say, well, it's based mainly on the harmony, since those chords give it the sound of mystery and danger it has. But then, the melody in its first three notes goes SO-FA#-DO, giving that nice tritone between the last two notes, adding to the sense of danger. I guess what I'm saying is that even in the most chordal passages we can think of, the melody contributes just as much as the harmony. This, I think, is one of the things that makes JW's music so masterful - the ability to create a rich musical expression through the manipulation of many parameters at once.

Your analysis? I thought it was my analysis.

What tedfud means is that there are always two different ways to analyze music. The horizontal aspect means focusing melody, that is, on how the music breaks down into different melodic lines put together. So of course there's usually a main melody in the top voice that we hear most prominently, there's the bass line, and even the inner parts form melodic lines as well. The vertical aspect means focusing on harmony, that is, on how the music breaks down into chords. The tricky thing is that all music involves both to some degree - by combining melodic lines together, you're going to get chords. And by combining a series of chords together, you're going to get melodic lines. What ted is asking is whether one of these aspects is MORE important in JW's music, so whether you hear the music as being more based on its melodic lines or its chord progressions. As I said above, I don't think we can generalize with all his music, but maybe with certain types of cues. Any ideas on which types of cues tend to be more melodically driven, and which ones more harmonically driven?

I guess I hear this differently. In most cases, the bVII chord is a dominant function chord and it's usually placed between two statements of the tonic chord, as in the song you cited. So I hear the pedal as completely separate from the chord above and not part of it. I'm just not sure what harmonic function you'd give the chord if you called it Bb11. I'm not calling it a Bb11, since it's clearly a VII with a pedal tonic. I'm just saying for that brief moment in time, it sounds like a Bb11. That is, it's got a modal and even kinda jazzy quality, which you wouldn't get if there was no Bb pedal, or it was replaced by an Ab. Ah, so the sonority of a Bb11 then. Cool - that I can buy. I knew you couldn't have meant it is a Bb11.

I guess I hear this differently. In most cases, the bVII chord is a dominant function chord and it's usually placed between two statements of the tonic chord, as in the song you cited. So I hear the pedal as completely separate from the chord above and not part of it. I'm just not sure what harmonic function you'd give the chord if you called it Bb11.

Good points all round, karelm. While we're talking about high registers, I would add the marvelous effect of the high violin tremolos on B-flat during the opening fanfare. They seem to give the music a heavenly glow, as though it is not at all bound to the earth. Again, it suggests the mythical to me when combined with the fanfare.

+1! Funny how this only sounds hilarious when you go from minor to major, and only certain themes as well, ones that tend to emphasize the 3rd scale degree, which makes it sound minor. I'm racking my brain to think of examples where minor melodies turn major but DON'T sound funny. Any ideas on that?

Thanks, Prometheus, for the bump. I had come across this before and thought this was a mighty helpful thread. We should really keep it going from time to time. I read through everything here and would add a couple of things that have not yet been mentioned as to the "Williams sound": 1) Pedal point 2) Musical form, especially in themes For those who don't know, pedal point is a simple device really - all you do is sustain or repeat a note, usually in the bass, and usually the tonic or dominant note of a scale (1st note or 5th note). But it's an enormously powerful technique for anchoring music around a certain tonic or dominant. Tonic pedals are by far the more common in Williams, probably because the harmony gets so complex that a dominant becomes very difficult to hear as such when the chords overtop have nothing to do with the key the dominant is in. I would say that this technique is so central to Williams' style that it deserves a thread of its own. If others are interested, I might do that in the next few days. Musical form is also something that hasn't yet been mentioned. Our fellow member filmmusic and I have had some lengthy discussions off-forum about form in Williams themes in particular. We agree that Williams bases his theme structures on patterns from classical music but that these patterns are altered in such a way that they actually become something else in the process. Again, this is something that could well be discussed in an entirely new thread. But the gist of it is that classical themes are based on statements of short ideas that are usually a couple of bars long. And in these classical themes, the ideas are either clearly the same as or clearly different from one another. The whole system of analyzing them is based on that principle. But in Williams, you usually start with a two-bar idea, then you get something that is kind of the same and yet kind of different, so it becomes difficult to classify the theme from a classical standpoint. In short, the classical models don't quite apply anymore, and what one needs to do is describe them in a slightly different way. I know this sounds very dry and esoteric, but I believe that it is one of the most fundamental things about Williams' style, at least in his main themes. And I think filmmusic would probably agree with this.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel that whatever Disney comes up with for Episode VII, it will have to be very different from the prequels. What they really need is some good new characters. That will allow for some good new music to be written for them. And since we know what a tremendous tunesmith Williams is, I'd be very interested to hear what he comes up with. I think that's largely what allowed such masterpieces as Luke's theme, the Imperial March, and Parade of the Ewoks to emerge from his pen. So my vote is a sort of conditional yes.

Hi ted - as always, a great question. Williams' music includes such an array of different styles that it's hard to say how to analyze his music in general. I really think it has to be on a case-by-case basis, or possibly by classifying certain cues and passages as being in a certain group with other of his cues. Without this kind of division of his music, what we say about one type of cue might not work at all for another. Our fellow member filmmusic, for example, pointed out in his thread on harmonic progressions in Williams that one of the themes in Born on the Fourth of July has an essentially diatonic melody in D major, but it becomes harmonized with some G#s, pulling the harmony in another direction. So here is a good example of the horizontal running contrary to the vertical. But that's just this theme. There are others, of course, but we'd really have to parse them and classify them together. Is there a particular cue you're looking at?

Hi all, I thought it would be clearest to have a new thread for each of these analyses I post. This one's on the Star Wars main title. Have a look if you're interested: http://www.filmmusicnotes.com/john-williams-themes-part-2-star-wars-main-title/ As always, your thoughts are welcome.

Thanks, Tom. I was wondering about that. I'll do that now.

My bad. I was thinking of the one within the main theme, which is an Ab major chord. Yes of course the one in the fanfare is like an F7sus4.

I would agree with this, but it's worth discussing more why this works. A flat-VII chord should be dominant in function. What is it that does not make us hear it as two different forms of dominant in a row? The chromatic shift, maybe. If it had just gone bVII-I, we would likely hear it as dominant. But the fact that the Ab is cancelled out by A-natural perhaps makes it sound like the F quartal has a different function from the chord that follows.

Why oops?

Oh yes, those things are absolutely Mixolydian. But then it goes right back to the dominant of B-flat major on the next chord. And there are hints of minor as well just before the return of the main theme. Lots of mixing of modes.

Part 2 is now ready - the Star Wars main title: http://www.filmmusicnotes.com/john-williams-themes-part-2-star-wars-main-title/ I've tried to point out new things in it, so let me know what you think...

Thank you, karelm. I never just like to be outright dismissive of anyone because they might have a point I hadn't considered before. And even if they don't I have respect for differing opinions of others, as long as they express them in non-threatening ways. What I disagree with in Ronald's comment is not his sentiment - that I can understand - but his implication that those who like this kind of music are "juvenile" etc. He has no right to condemn others for their likes or dislikes - that I find offensive. Anyway, I know I'm preaching to the converted here, but I thought I would say how I saw things. Oh yes, I saw that Goldsmith interview. He seemed so disappointed! He slaved over this romantic sounding main title, and the other one he said took him "five minutes"! He also didn't like that they used a cue from one of his older films instead of what he wanted to write for it. Poor Jerry! And yes, I think you're right about the textural complexity being mistaken for overall musical complexity. I suppose we're all in agreement in this thread because that's the sort of thing others have said about Williams melodic style as well. As with anyone who is a master of their craft, Williams just makes it look easy when it is anything but. Thanks again for your response, karelm.