karelm

The fact is that no one has done in-depth musicological work on Williams' music, and while there will always be some things about music that remain ineffable, there is a vast difference between pretending one can explain every note of a Williams cue and providing a mere glimpse of some of a cue's workings. We analysts on this board are all in the latter camp. I'd rather have this small amount of analysis than none at all since 99% of a great piece of music can be explained with music theory. The other 1% is magic.
And we're nowhere near that 99%, so we don't need your pity just yet.

Don't think so.
I can honestly say that LOST is the only series I ever saw that didn't have a single weak episode.

Wow, what a great picture! That's from 1983? Awesome!

Pretty badass pic dude. How rare, to have met John Williams, brown-haired version!

I thought the concert was good. The playing of the Houston Symphony for the program was not quite at the same standard as the orchestras that play on the original soundtracks (we are symphony subscribers and they normally perform at a very high level so assume the short rehearsal window – JW and Mr. Ma only arrived the day before the concert had something to do with it).

I actually thought the encores were performed better than the second half music – I would rank the first half, encores, than the second half. I have been going to JW concerts for years (see attached from the last time he conducted the symphony in 1983) and he has slowed down but seemed to be invigorated as the concert went on.

The encore for the first half was Pickin’, for the second half Schindler’s List, Star Wars main theme, Yoda’s Theme and the Imperial March. It was clear that Mr. Ma and JW were having a great time.
Great concert!

In my very humble opinion, this is a masterful score. I'm loving it more and more after each listen.

If I may... Um, I'll tell you the problem with the synthetic power that you're using here, it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step. You didn't earn the knowledge for yourselves, so you don't take any responsibility for it. You stood on the shoulders of synth libraries to accomplish something as fast as you could, and before you even knew what you had, you patented it, and packaged it, and slapped it on a plastic lunchbox, and now you're selling it, you wanna sell it.
These synth wizards were so preoccupied with whether or not they could that they didn't stop to think if they should.

Thanks! I forgot to mention, the conductor was David Weiss who played on a few films you might have heard of...1941, Close Encounters, E.T., Far and Away, Hook, Temple of Doom, War Horse, not too shabby a list.

Excuse the self promotion, but today marks the 1 year anniversary since my orchestral work, Orbit: A Symphonic Fantasy premiered.
I'm especially proud of the comparison in this review since his music is what inspired me to become a composer in the first place:
"It is no surprise that Karim's music, as evidenced by this rather enjoyable CD, bears the grand DNA of the epic film score. Orbit, with its inspiration from the final NASA space flight, lacks nothing in braggadocio and unstoppable confidence borne on high by the huge orchestral dynamism of John Williams and Howard Shore. The melodic material is inevitably bound at times to recall Star Wars, Superman and ET but the later pages take a tincture from Bernard Herrmann at his most subtle. Thus the music fades into a rainbow shimmer of strings underpinned by a deeply brooding bass. At the end Elmahmoudi cannot resist the epic valedictory full stop with the orchestra at full stretch. This could easily be seen as music to James Michener’s fine novel: Space (1982)."
- Rob Barnett, Musicweb-International CD review (http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2013/Mar13/Elmahmoudi_Orbit.htm)
The premiere performance took place on November 18, 2012, with David Weiss conducting LA Dr Symphony Orchestra. I am thrilled and honored that this work has been embraced by audiences and welcomed by the California Science Center (permanent home of the Space Shuttle Endeavour) as part of their hourly IMAX presentations. To date, it has been heard by well over one million people and has been taken up by the JPL scientists of the Mars Curiosity Rover where it was used as a part of the one year anniversary of their highly successful mission to Mars!
The origin of this work is based on my lifelong fascination with science and especially astronomy and I was fortunate to be able to merge my two passions into a musical composition. Orbit: A Symphonic Fantasy is a large scale fifteen minute adventurous and atmospheric orchestral work, with an epic and dramatic finale. To create this work, kindly commissioned by the Los Angeles Doctors Symphony Orchestra, I was inspired by explorers and visionaries throughout history. I wanted to create a tribute of sorts to the spirit of adventure, courage, and heroic exploration perfectly described by the sixteenth century explorer, Ferdinand Magellan: “The sea is dangerous and its storms terrible, but these obstacles have never been sufficient reason to remain ashore…It is with an iron will that they embark on the most daring of all endeavors ... to meet the shadowy future without fear and conquer the unknown."


At NASA JPL with Bobak ("mohawk guy") Ferdoski. He is the mission director of the Mars Curiosity Rover and a great guy. Behind him are the first two pictures taken by Curiosity on Mars just after it landed during its insanely complicated "7 minutes of hell" descent.

Concert performance (David Weiss conducting with me in the trombone section):

And John van Houton on tuba right next to me.

It is on Amazon and iTunes...and sorry for the self promo but was excited about the anniversary being today!

Excuse the self promotion, but today marks the 1 year anniversary since my orchestral work, Orbit: A Symphonic Fantasy premiered.
I'm especially proud of the comparison in this review since his music is what inspired me to become a composer in the first place:
"It is no surprise that Karim's music, as evidenced by this rather enjoyable CD, bears the grand DNA of the epic film score. Orbit, with its inspiration from the final NASA space flight, lacks nothing in braggadocio and unstoppable confidence borne on high by the huge orchestral dynamism of John Williams and Howard Shore. The melodic material is inevitably bound at times to recall Star Wars, Superman and ET but the later pages take a tincture from Bernard Herrmann at his most subtle. Thus the music fades into a rainbow shimmer of strings underpinned by a deeply brooding bass. At the end Elmahmoudi cannot resist the epic valedictory full stop with the orchestra at full stretch. This could easily be seen as music to James Michener’s fine novel: Space (1982)."
- Rob Barnett, Musicweb-International CD review (http://www.musicweb-international.com/classrev/2013/Mar13/Elmahmoudi_Orbit.htm)
The premiere performance took place on November 18, 2012, with David Weiss conducting LA Dr Symphony Orchestra. I am thrilled and honored that this work has been embraced by audiences and welcomed by the California Science Center (permanent home of the Space Shuttle Endeavour) as part of their hourly IMAX presentations. To date, it has been heard by well over one million people and has been taken up by the JPL scientists of the Mars Curiosity Rover where it was used as a part of the one year anniversary of their highly successful mission to Mars!
The origin of this work is based on my lifelong fascination with science and especially astronomy and I was fortunate to be able to merge my two passions into a musical composition. Orbit: A Symphonic Fantasy is a large scale fifteen minute adventurous and atmospheric orchestral work, with an epic and dramatic finale. To create this work, kindly commissioned by the Los Angeles Doctors Symphony Orchestra, I was inspired by explorers and visionaries throughout history. I wanted to create a tribute of sorts to the spirit of adventure, courage, and heroic exploration perfectly described by the sixteenth century explorer, Ferdinand Magellan: “The sea is dangerous and its storms terrible, but these obstacles have never been sufficient reason to remain ashore…It is with an iron will that they embark on the most daring of all endeavors ... to meet the shadowy future without fear and conquer the unknown."


At NASA JPL with Bobak ("mohawk guy") Ferdoski. He is the mission director of the Mars Curiosity Rover and a great guy. Behind him are the first two pictures taken by Curiosity on Mars just after it landed during its insanely complicated "7 minutes of hell" descent.

Concert performance (David Weiss conducting with me in the trombone section):

And John van Houton on tuba right next to me.

It is on Amazon and iTunes...and sorry for the self promo but was excited about the anniversary being today!

Though I've not seen the movie, I bought the OST today and absolutely love it! It's a winner. All the same finger prints of the master composer in non-bombast mode are here. It is truly lovely - especially enjoyed "Revealing the Secret" and "The Visitor at Himmel Street". The score definitely has a sense of wonder, innocence, and bittersweet longing. Somewhat reminds me of the slow music from A.I., Lincoln, and War Horse. In some small way, I also hear Prokofiev Symphony No. 7 (which I absolutely adore) without the manic nor Russian qualities, but rather the faery tale sweep of the big theme.

7:45 of this:

I really hope this score gets the recognition it deserves because the film seems to not be getting good reviews. I'd love to study this score which is my stamp for any JW score it seems. I believe this might not be the type of score that non-fans would understand what makes it so good. It is so full of high quality that isn't really asked for by most.

Yes, Abbey Road uses B&W 800 D monitors. These are heavy beasts (maybe about 250 lbs each) and I adore the sound of these speakers because they are exceptionally clear, warm, and detailed - especially well suited for acoustic music such as orchestral and jazz. So the idea is that when the engineers are recording a top level orchestral ensemble, having a great sound in the booth will help them get the pest recording since they have a real sense of how the mic placement and levels are working based on the precision of those B&W monitors. Since a room is typically made up of an assortment of complex microphone and patterns and a precise array of placement (the sweet spot for a trumpet and frequency response would mean a Royer mic would be great for trumpet but not for violin as an example where a vintage neumann would probably work better for the violin). These mics can cost up to tens of thousands each and in a typical orchestral setting, one might have 48 microphones - the end result is a very complex array of mics, placement, frequencies, phasing issues etc. A detailed and wonderful set of monitors (such as B&W) will help the engineer realize the ideal placement, mic selection, etc., to get the best recording given the ensemble, skills, and style. Basically, you end up getting a very accurate audio picture of what is happening in the room. This is the theory of why it is a good thing to have high end monitors at these top studios. I believe Skywalker Ranch also has those same monitors. BIS, the Scandinavian classical label uses B&W to mix their award winning recordings. Though much of the recorded sound comes from the decca tree above the conductor which captures the left, right, and center channels of the room, each instrument group will have a mic (or several) to capture the texture, solo, or clarity of the instrument and get mixed in low since instruments have an ideal "sweet spot" that is usually not close to it and this mixture is what we hear in recordings generally. Do note, many times the mixer will "fix" issues of frequency responses and such while doing the edit and mix probably in their own studios, but having the source material captured in the most ideal way from the start makes their job much easier.

Kasdan has barely written anything since the 80s. Which bodes well (for old Star Wars sensibilities)

Book Thief Samples!
It sounds gorgeous! Reminds me a bit of Angela's Ashes and A.I. . Beautifully lyrical stuff.

I love orchestrating and have been fortunate to have had some wonderful opportunities to work on nice, big, meaty projects in this capacity. Orchestrators are professionals and as such there is often a hierarchy. The lead orchestrator might be responsible for the overall score but others have sections to orchestrate. In school, we all orchestrated the same sketch using the composer's direction. Though everyone sounded pretty close, we all obviously had different perspectives. Exactly how much creativity the orchestrator is entitled to depends on the project and the who the boss is. Even when you see only one orchestrator credited the odds are there are assistantant orchestrators involved who have the job to do their work in the style of the lead/principal orchestrator. In "Star Trek, the Motion Picture", Goldsmith had Arthur Morton as principal orchestrator but also Sandy Courage, Fred Steiner, and himself so a team of at least four who handled different scenes. So a good orchestrator can either work in the style of someone else or in their own way depending on the need they are asked to serve. Additionally, some composers seek ideas from orchestrators and will see them as trusted allies & collaborators. The relationship between composer/orchestrator is quite good overall since they might take the composers efforts up a notch while allowing the composer to focus on the next in a long list of headaches.
As an analogy - if you are recording a world class orchestra in a pristine hall with the best conductor, instruments, gear, etc., you probably want as true a reflection of the performance as possible. Alternatively, sometimes you actually might want some nuance, or color that specific mics or pre-amps can add. There is a Neumann 1950's sound that differs from the 2010's sound (both good but quite different). Pre-amps can generally add a tone color that some might find off-putting ("...that is not what the 3million dollar Stradivarius sounded like live so don't cheapen it with a $10,000 preamp that colors it unnaturally!") whereas sometimes what you want is that nuance added. So you can think of this with orchestrators as well. They have a sound of their own that can be heard (there is a Neve "sound" which is great for films not so great for the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra) but you can usually dial them up or down to select the amount of tone color desired based on the intention. You might have orchestrators who excel at various things (such as the love theme orchestrator, the action music orchestrator, the main titles orchestrator) all for the same project. Sometimes the issue is the dreaded lack of time...situations where the orchestra is recording at 9am on Monday morning, it is 9pm on Sunday and the composer is still working on the cue because the director isn't happy with something - it has to be orchestrated for 120 piece orchestra and STILL GO OUT TO THE COPYIST TONIGHT TO BE READY TO RECORD BEFORE 9AM! (<- Real scenario). In cases like this, you might get multiple orchestrators on the same cue where the speed is the most important thing...you are in disaster mode here and won't be able to ask anyone a question for clarity so it all comes down to judgment. In situations like this, it might look like the orchestrator took too many liberties but the reality is you saved the day. The time crunch can be difficult to comprehend in its cruel intensity.
With this said, sometimes orchestrators just divvy up the work load arbitrarily (you handle the "A" orchestra and I'll handle the "B" orchestra) but in general, top level orchestrators should not be very noticeable when on the same project because they have one ultimate boss. Examples where the orchestrator is just helping save time is where the composer might say something like "take the idea from cue 1M2, bar 5-10, and extrapolate it to this new cue in a similar way but matching the new harmony". In that case, though the orchestrator is creating notes that are not in the sketch, the intent is clear and the notes are still technically all from the composer. Sometimes the request from the composer is: "I'm sorry, I fell behind and didn't have time to work on the the directors latest notes - he didn't like these 30 seconds, can you please get rid of what I have and do something that addresses his notes"). In that case, the orchestrator is composing (creating new material) but doubtful would be credited as such.
95 % of music that is orchestrated can be done by any other proficient and experienced orchestrator. That remaining 5% is for the specialist you call in for a particul need ("I need an authentic 1920's style orchestration of a pop tune" or I need maximum carniage from the orchestra here, Mr. avante guarde composer/orchestrator"). With JW, he is very specific about how it should be orchestrated because he knows what he's doing whereas others, don't even double check the orchestration before it is recorded with the orchestra and might not even be aware of what changes to their score the orchestrator did in the service of the schedule and demands placed on them. It is a gray area full of judgement and professionals are adaptable, dependable, and knowledable.
You can sumarize the job of the professional orchestrator as this: make the person who hired you look good. To do this, one might need to add new material that wasn't there before but serves their need regardless. It should be performed/recorded quickly and probably not be noticed that you are the one who solved the problem in which case you might have been too distinctive.

I love orchestrating and have been fortunate to have had some wonderful opportunities to work on nice, big, meaty projects in this capacity. Orchestrators are professionals and as such there is often a hierarchy. The lead orchestrator might be responsible for the overall score but others have sections to orchestrate. In school, we all orchestrated the same sketch using the composer's direction. Though everyone sounded pretty close, we all obviously had different perspectives. Exactly how much creativity the orchestrator is entitled to depends on the project and the who the boss is. Even when you see only one orchestrator credited the odds are there are assistantant orchestrators involved who have the job to do their work in the style of the lead/principal orchestrator. In "Star Trek, the Motion Picture", Goldsmith had Arthur Morton as principal orchestrator but also Sandy Courage, Fred Steiner, and himself so a team of at least four who handled different scenes. So a good orchestrator can either work in the style of someone else or in their own way depending on the need they are asked to serve. Additionally, some composers seek ideas from orchestrators and will see them as trusted allies & collaborators. The relationship between composer/orchestrator is quite good overall since they might take the composers efforts up a notch while allowing the composer to focus on the next in a long list of headaches.
As an analogy - if you are recording a world class orchestra in a pristine hall with the best conductor, instruments, gear, etc., you probably want as true a reflection of the performance as possible. Alternatively, sometimes you actually might want some nuance, or color that specific mics or pre-amps can add. There is a Neumann 1950's sound that differs from the 2010's sound (both good but quite different). Pre-amps can generally add a tone color that some might find off-putting ("...that is not what the 3million dollar Stradivarius sounded like live so don't cheapen it with a $10,000 preamp that colors it unnaturally!") whereas sometimes what you want is that nuance added. So you can think of this with orchestrators as well. They have a sound of their own that can be heard (there is a Neve "sound" which is great for films not so great for the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra) but you can usually dial them up or down to select the amount of tone color desired based on the intention. You might have orchestrators who excel at various things (such as the love theme orchestrator, the action music orchestrator, the main titles orchestrator) all for the same project. Sometimes the issue is the dreaded lack of time...situations where the orchestra is recording at 9am on Monday morning, it is 9pm on Sunday and the composer is still working on the cue because the director isn't happy with something - it has to be orchestrated for 120 piece orchestra and STILL GO OUT TO THE COPYIST TONIGHT TO BE READY TO RECORD BEFORE 9AM! (<- Real scenario). In cases like this, you might get multiple orchestrators on the same cue where the speed is the most important thing...you are in disaster mode here and won't be able to ask anyone a question for clarity so it all comes down to judgment. In situations like this, it might look like the orchestrator took too many liberties but the reality is you saved the day. The time crunch can be difficult to comprehend in its cruel intensity.
With this said, sometimes orchestrators just divvy up the work load arbitrarily (you handle the "A" orchestra and I'll handle the "B" orchestra) but in general, top level orchestrators should not be very noticeable when on the same project because they have one ultimate boss. Examples where the orchestrator is just helping save time is where the composer might say something like "take the idea from cue 1M2, bar 5-10, and extrapolate it to this new cue in a similar way but matching the new harmony". In that case, though the orchestrator is creating notes that are not in the sketch, the intent is clear and the notes are still technically all from the composer. Sometimes the request from the composer is: "I'm sorry, I fell behind and didn't have time to work on the the directors latest notes - he didn't like these 30 seconds, can you please get rid of what I have and do something that addresses his notes"). In that case, the orchestrator is composing (creating new material) but doubtful would be credited as such.
95 % of music that is orchestrated can be done by any other proficient and experienced orchestrator. That remaining 5% is for the specialist you call in for a particul need ("I need an authentic 1920's style orchestration of a pop tune" or I need maximum carniage from the orchestra here, Mr. avante guarde composer/orchestrator"). With JW, he is very specific about how it should be orchestrated because he knows what he's doing whereas others, don't even double check the orchestration before it is recorded with the orchestra and might not even be aware of what changes to their score the orchestrator did in the service of the schedule and demands placed on them. It is a gray area full of judgement and professionals are adaptable, dependable, and knowledable.
You can sumarize the job of the professional orchestrator as this: make the person who hired you look good. To do this, one might need to add new material that wasn't there before but serves their need regardless. It should be performed/recorded quickly and probably not be noticed that you are the one who solved the problem in which case you might have been too distinctive.

I love orchestrating and have been fortunate to have had some wonderful opportunities to work on nice, big, meaty projects in this capacity. Orchestrators are professionals and as such there is often a hierarchy. The lead orchestrator might be responsible for the overall score but others have sections to orchestrate. In school, we all orchestrated the same sketch using the composer's direction. Though everyone sounded pretty close, we all obviously had different perspectives. Exactly how much creativity the orchestrator is entitled to depends on the project and the who the boss is. Even when you see only one orchestrator credited the odds are there are assistantant orchestrators involved who have the job to do their work in the style of the lead/principal orchestrator. In "Star Trek, the Motion Picture", Goldsmith had Arthur Morton as principal orchestrator but also Sandy Courage, Fred Steiner, and himself so a team of at least four who handled different scenes. So a good orchestrator can either work in the style of someone else or in their own way depending on the need they are asked to serve. Additionally, some composers seek ideas from orchestrators and will see them as trusted allies & collaborators. The relationship between composer/orchestrator is quite good overall since they might take the composers efforts up a notch while allowing the composer to focus on the next in a long list of headaches.
As an analogy - if you are recording a world class orchestra in a pristine hall with the best conductor, instruments, gear, etc., you probably want as true a reflection of the performance as possible. Alternatively, sometimes you actually might want some nuance, or color that specific mics or pre-amps can add. There is a Neumann 1950's sound that differs from the 2010's sound (both good but quite different). Pre-amps can generally add a tone color that some might find off-putting ("...that is not what the 3million dollar Stradivarius sounded like live so don't cheapen it with a $10,000 preamp that colors it unnaturally!") whereas sometimes what you want is that nuance added. So you can think of this with orchestrators as well. They have a sound of their own that can be heard (there is a Neve "sound" which is great for films not so great for the Royal Concertgebouw Orchestra) but you can usually dial them up or down to select the amount of tone color desired based on the intention. You might have orchestrators who excel at various things (such as the love theme orchestrator, the action music orchestrator, the main titles orchestrator) all for the same project. Sometimes the issue is the dreaded lack of time...situations where the orchestra is recording at 9am on Monday morning, it is 9pm on Sunday and the composer is still working on the cue because the director isn't happy with something - it has to be orchestrated for 120 piece orchestra and STILL GO OUT TO THE COPYIST TONIGHT TO BE READY TO RECORD BEFORE 9AM! (<- Real scenario). In cases like this, you might get multiple orchestrators on the same cue where the speed is the most important thing...you are in disaster mode here and won't be able to ask anyone a question for clarity so it all comes down to judgment. In situations like this, it might look like the orchestrator took too many liberties but the reality is you saved the day. The time crunch can be difficult to comprehend in its cruel intensity.
With this said, sometimes orchestrators just divvy up the work load arbitrarily (you handle the "A" orchestra and I'll handle the "B" orchestra) but in general, top level orchestrators should not be very noticeable when on the same project because they have one ultimate boss. Examples where the orchestrator is just helping save time is where the composer might say something like "take the idea from cue 1M2, bar 5-10, and extrapolate it to this new cue in a similar way but matching the new harmony". In that case, though the orchestrator is creating notes that are not in the sketch, the intent is clear and the notes are still technically all from the composer. Sometimes the request from the composer is: "I'm sorry, I fell behind and didn't have time to work on the the directors latest notes - he didn't like these 30 seconds, can you please get rid of what I have and do something that addresses his notes"). In that case, the orchestrator is composing (creating new material) but doubtful would be credited as such.
95 % of music that is orchestrated can be done by any other proficient and experienced orchestrator. That remaining 5% is for the specialist you call in for a particul need ("I need an authentic 1920's style orchestration of a pop tune" or I need maximum carniage from the orchestra here, Mr. avante guarde composer/orchestrator"). With JW, he is very specific about how it should be orchestrated because he knows what he's doing whereas others, don't even double check the orchestration before it is recorded with the orchestra and might not even be aware of what changes to their score the orchestrator did in the service of the schedule and demands placed on them. It is a gray area full of judgement and professionals are adaptable, dependable, and knowledable.
You can sumarize the job of the professional orchestrator as this: make the person who hired you look good. To do this, one might need to add new material that wasn't there before but serves their need regardless. It should be performed/recorded quickly and probably not be noticed that you are the one who solved the problem in which case you might have been too distinctive.

Thor, i know more than a few outside-Hollywood movies and i know that even if from this day on no movie ever would have a score at all, you still would compulsively insist that there never was a better period for film music, it's just your nature.
What i think should be made clearer,especially in light of whom this messageboard is dedicated to, is that a lot of people think of film music as a way of vivid storytelling. And you can twist and turn, this isn't how music by and large functions today in film, and not only Hollywood, since a lot of non-HW-filmmakers of course are influenced by that, too. Of course there are bright spots and brilliant applications of music to picture, but that is really not the norm and also shouldn't include great song scores (we just as well might include cricket chirping then).
So in essence, i don't dislike a score like GIRL WITH A DRAGON TATTOO per se, i like quite a few Martinez or Mansell scores (recently: STOKER!) but i also see that they often don't function as great storytelling but more as loose moodsetters that often are rather vague in what they are conveying. This isn't to say they are bad or good, only that they are not able to direct my interest as the best Herrmann/Williams/Goldsmith-etc. scores could do. And that, for me is a fact that can be objectively proven. And those examples are still miles better than a lot - read. not all - factory-assembled RCP clone scores that range from GAME OF THRONES to the recent ENDER'S GAME.

My opinion is Zimmer is not revolution but influential. He owes a big part of his success to two things:
The ability to produce more widgets (music product) than anyone else faster and to speck via his army of minions thus inundating the “sound” of movies we expect to hear. The loss of nearly all real composers in a very short interval of time resulting in a dearth of alternatives (John Barry, Goldsmith, Bernstein, Kamen, Jarre, Poledouris). Meanwhile, JW slowed down in the past decade to only a handful of scores and was therefore not quite as impactful as he was in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Since HZ inundated movies given his ability to somehow work on multiple projects at the same time given his methods, and having so many alumni of his company – they were everywhere. He also had a string of huge hits (Pirates, Dark Knight, etc.) resulting in new group of directors saying “hey, I want a hit too…let me copy their formula”.
Since the alternatives have slowed down or died off – you get a lot of INFLUENCE of HZ and RC. A lot of films get temped with his stuff because directors think this is what movies sound like since there aren’t a lot of alternatives and Hollywood is not generally keen on risk.
JW is timeless whereas HZ is more of a fad that will fade away when alternatives make money and everyone starts emulating that new thing.

My opinion is Zimmer is not revolution but influential. He owes a big part of his success to two things:
The ability to produce more widgets (music product) than anyone else faster and to speck via his army of minions thus inundating the “sound” of movies we expect to hear. The loss of nearly all real composers in a very short interval of time resulting in a dearth of alternatives (John Barry, Goldsmith, Bernstein, Kamen, Jarre, Poledouris). Meanwhile, JW slowed down in the past decade to only a handful of scores and was therefore not quite as impactful as he was in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Since HZ inundated movies given his ability to somehow work on multiple projects at the same time given his methods, and having so many alumni of his company – they were everywhere. He also had a string of huge hits (Pirates, Dark Knight, etc.) resulting in new group of directors saying “hey, I want a hit too…let me copy their formula”.
Since the alternatives have slowed down or died off – you get a lot of INFLUENCE of HZ and RC. A lot of films get temped with his stuff because directors think this is what movies sound like since there aren’t a lot of alternatives and Hollywood is not generally keen on risk.
JW is timeless whereas HZ is more of a fad that will fade away when alternatives make money and everyone starts emulating that new thing.

My opinion is Zimmer is not revolution but influential. He owes a big part of his success to two things:
The ability to produce more widgets (music product) than anyone else faster and to speck via his army of minions thus inundating the “sound” of movies we expect to hear. The loss of nearly all real composers in a very short interval of time resulting in a dearth of alternatives (John Barry, Goldsmith, Bernstein, Kamen, Jarre, Poledouris). Meanwhile, JW slowed down in the past decade to only a handful of scores and was therefore not quite as impactful as he was in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Since HZ inundated movies given his ability to somehow work on multiple projects at the same time given his methods, and having so many alumni of his company – they were everywhere. He also had a string of huge hits (Pirates, Dark Knight, etc.) resulting in new group of directors saying “hey, I want a hit too…let me copy their formula”.
Since the alternatives have slowed down or died off – you get a lot of INFLUENCE of HZ and RC. A lot of films get temped with his stuff because directors think this is what movies sound like since there aren’t a lot of alternatives and Hollywood is not generally keen on risk.
JW is timeless whereas HZ is more of a fad that will fade away when alternatives make money and everyone starts emulating that new thing.

I think Zimmer has been an innovator on the music production and business side of things, adapting with chameleon-like skill to the modern film business environment.

Revolutionary, no. Divisive, yes. But if by revolutionary you mean the ability to cause such divisiveness, then perhaps the answer is yes.

My understanding is he considers his work more of a craft. I don't think he has a "Eureka - that's it" moment while working but rather works very hard to refine it and is self critical so when it passes his self assessment (which is a struggle given the high standards), then it will have all the Williamsims that we know and love and like all great works, will have a sense of inevitability when one hears it that it couldn't have been any other way. I once asked one of his kids if they recall any moments where he came out of his study/office screaming "Wow, I just nailed this...Eureka, come and listen!" and the response was that it was more like he was just at work and there seemed to be just focus, intent effort rather than a sense of "this will be my great work" meanwhile these masterworks were being created. Don, his brother, said of JW that his idea of a fun relaxing evening was working. When going on vacation, he'd have a piano brought in to their hotel while the family is out at the pool...that was just how he would relax. The sense I got was that it was a job he did very well and cared about the quality of his work deeply and thoroughly, but he was just doing his thing - putting great effort - no lazy bone in his body (or mind), and he has been at it a very long time so has a good sense if something is going to work or not before putting in the work. Conrad Pope once said he's never seen anyone attack a musical problem as hard as JW does when working and this is the same sense I hear from many others.
With that said, I don't consider JW the modern equal of Mozart. Apologies if this was already covered earlier in the thread, but here are some differences:
1. Mozart was a revolutionary composer; Williams is ultimately a composer who looks to the past mostly. Mozart had tremendous impact on the course of western music with greater role of dynamics, duration, orchestration, drama, form, intensity, etc. He laid the groundwork for Beethoven and the end of the Classical period as it shifted to Romantic. In contrast, I view JW as the last of a line of craft oriented composers who were well studied, hard workers, but ultimately brilliant because of their work quality, ethic, and practical training since he's from the tradition of Korngold, Herrmann, Mancini, Goldsmith, Bernstein, etc.
2. I believe Mozart might have been a high functioning aspergers/autistic person. His musical memory of other people's music is not normal. I don't have evidence for this and since his body isn't found and there aren't descendants to positively match DNA with, I doubt we'll ever know for sure other than through anecdotal evidence if this hunch is true.
3. To Mozart, composition came easily saying: " got to write at breakneck speed—everything's composed—but not written yet." whereas JW is a craftsman who takes care of each note and idea. Mozart might have had ADD, and OCD whereas JW is a workaholic. The end result is two great but different composers.

My understanding is he considers his work more of a craft. I don't think he has a "Eureka - that's it" moment while working but rather works very hard to refine it and is self critical so when it passes his self assessment (which is a struggle given the high standards), then it will have all the Williamsims that we know and love and like all great works, will have a sense of inevitability when one hears it that it couldn't have been any other way. I once asked one of his kids if they recall any moments where he came out of his study/office screaming "Wow, I just nailed this...Eureka, come and listen!" and the response was that it was more like he was just at work and there seemed to be just focus, intent effort rather than a sense of "this will be my great work" meanwhile these masterworks were being created. Don, his brother, said of JW that his idea of a fun relaxing evening was working. When going on vacation, he'd have a piano brought in to their hotel while the family is out at the pool...that was just how he would relax. The sense I got was that it was a job he did very well and cared about the quality of his work deeply and thoroughly, but he was just doing his thing - putting great effort - no lazy bone in his body (or mind), and he has been at it a very long time so has a good sense if something is going to work or not before putting in the work. Conrad Pope once said he's never seen anyone attack a musical problem as hard as JW does when working and this is the same sense I hear from many others.
With that said, I don't consider JW the modern equal of Mozart. Apologies if this was already covered earlier in the thread, but here are some differences:
1. Mozart was a revolutionary composer; Williams is ultimately a composer who looks to the past mostly. Mozart had tremendous impact on the course of western music with greater role of dynamics, duration, orchestration, drama, form, intensity, etc. He laid the groundwork for Beethoven and the end of the Classical period as it shifted to Romantic. In contrast, I view JW as the last of a line of craft oriented composers who were well studied, hard workers, but ultimately brilliant because of their work quality, ethic, and practical training since he's from the tradition of Korngold, Herrmann, Mancini, Goldsmith, Bernstein, etc.
2. I believe Mozart might have been a high functioning aspergers/autistic person. His musical memory of other people's music is not normal. I don't have evidence for this and since his body isn't found and there aren't descendants to positively match DNA with, I doubt we'll ever know for sure other than through anecdotal evidence if this hunch is true.
3. To Mozart, composition came easily saying: " got to write at breakneck speed—everything's composed—but not written yet." whereas JW is a craftsman who takes care of each note and idea. Mozart might have had ADD, and OCD whereas JW is a workaholic. The end result is two great but different composers.