tony69

you forgot about: SACHA BARON COHEN — BORAT: CULTURAL LEARNINGS OF AMERICA FOR MAKE BENEFIT GLORIOUS NATION OF KAZAKHSTAN

at 1:56 of prayer of peace to 2:13.

haha me too. i'd trade everything... only you probably have everything i have. sounds EXCITING tho. can't believesomeone ACTUALLY put it on Ebay. who was the seller? i'm curious to know where he got it from.

the conqueror.

I was listening to some stuff lately and have just recently discovered a William's musical trait. Though some of his pieces or themes may be considered derivative from another piece, this trait I believe is a unique trait of williams. It is his dominant preparations to back to a recap of the theme. In particular, listen to measures 24-28 of the Prayer for Peace. That development/preparation is uniquely Williams. I dont think you can name another composer who does it that way. Another piece with similar buildups include some harry potter stuff (like fawkes or the buildup to the main title sequence in harry potter 1). The other stuff that people have suggested like boom tsss or horn/cello doublings I've heard from other composers, but i think this is a truly unique trait. What do you fellows think?

check this out. sounds like close encounters http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orLpZxEd24Y

they hire people to write it. according to hans zimmer anyways.

well not as complex as strauss. i await the day where willilams writes something a la ein heldenbeen. who else wants this:)?

snakes on the plane is by far the BEST SCORE EVER

Wow, i didnt like the theme AT ALL. i must say it seems quite bland... in my opinion. he keeps on repeating that trumpet fanfare over and over. 6 times is way too much... and the melody isnt THAT catchy. just my honest opinion. i agree with someone above. he wrote it in 20 minutes. and strings for the unaware, is there. its doing the regualr willaims type of trill thing like he did for star wars. its at hte very end. I wonder how much musicians get paid to record 10 seconds.... omg he needs to redeem himself with...INDY 4!!! YAY.

good point:p. tho i'm not too sure a 4 year old will understand that a pentatonic scale will make is sound like mingus... or a sus chords sound like elton jonh... prolly they're just trying to learn how to sing baabaa black sheep at this time.

renting boston library is possible. i know people who do visit libraries and stuff like that. but u need a good intent. or good connections.

Well 3.141592, you did not specify what theory you were mentioning. Even the lowest "ring" of musicians know music theory. However, they only need to know whatever theory applies to them. Thus, if you hire studio musicians in the pop industry, you are expected to know chord symbols and all the stuff. improvisation on chords, etcetc. It is a standard that you MUST have or else quite literally you won't be able to get gigs. Likewise, with film music, perhaps you do not need to know what is schenkerian analysis but you DO need a grasp of tonality considering almost all the humamble tunes ARE tonal. You see where I'm coming from? Yes, film composers do need to be likeable etc. But they also need to know the basics. P.S. With heart and soul, playing only the white notes do not work. Pretty soon even the improvisers discover that playing only F (accenting it) on the first two chords sounds horrible. They learn to stay away from that and stick to three main notes. p.s.s. i love that analogy as well.

fantastic. there's already been another herrmann and goldsmith documentary out. i saw it but i cant remember the name... sorry.

Tony if we are not talking about writing music what are we talking about?? Success in what then?? You are not making clear arguments. You claim that I can know Marcus' James Horner theory with no study just because I play chopsticks on a piano? I thought the theory we were speaking of took semisters of knowldege to achieve. For most people who do play piano chopsticks, they just do it by pattern recognition and can scarecly tell the differnece between a C and E on the piano. Hence they always start the notes in the wrong place and play it in mixolydian mode or somethign wierd. I admire your enthusiam but I do not understand your points of the last few posts. Let me reiterate. Your original argument which most of us are arguing against is that "One does not need to know ANY music theory to be successful in the music business." (if you do not believe me, read your original message) We are not talking about writing music, but whether music theory is necessary to be successful. And no we did not mention whether the theory was that which took seminars to achieve. You just stated music theory in general. Of course, most musicians spend at least a year learning music theory (rudiments at least) to be able to grasp what is a major scale, or what is a chord, etc. Several other members and I have refuted your argument by claiming it is impossible to play anything without knowing any theory. For instance, pop musicians HAVE TO know what triads are, what a C/G chord is or A/F. Or Jazz musicians must know chord-scale theory, voicings, tritone substitutions etc in order to improvise on the standards. Or for Classical composers, you have to know basic tonal harmony; not knowing any would literally make you a joke. Yes, you can play chopsticks without knowing any theory. But could you improvise on Heart and Soul without knowing the basics of a C-Am-F(or Dm/F)-G progression? The answer is NO. You cannot play randomn notes (again assuming you have NO musical theory) and expect to be successful. That is completely impossible. anyways, back to the original topic at hand, I recently discovered the Flute concerto. its a great 12 tone piece. anyone heard it?

actually wriitng 7 minutes a day is not impossible. i've done it, but i would not prefer to do so if i could. it gives less time for revisions and thematic continuity etcetc. and so what if jazz players cant read or spell an italian 6th? We were NEVER talking about reading or writing music. we're talking about whether music theory is necessary for success and it is. music theory does not entail reading notes. for instance, jazz musicians DO have music theories. chord-scale theory, tritone substitutions, modes, voicings. its not classical theory, but is still necessary music theory to be successful. how do you want to improvise if you dont know what a C7b5 chord is? etcetc. i think my point is clear enough.

Anyways, so i was wondering pi. You stated: "music theory helps some people yes. But many people in the business suceed very well with out it. Reading music is not neccassary any more with the invent of recording techniques and computer sequencers. " So with all this discussion we've had so far, name at least 4 people in the industry that are successful who do not know music theory? I will think you cannot name any. Even trevor rabin and hans zimmer knows some theory. This has nothing to do with your JNH argument about the synth. Yes, using a synth is not a problem, but we weren't initially arguing that in the first place. we were arguing whether people can succeed int he business without music theory. and i will think you cannot find any. even the people that play on the keyboard, they will know some music theory or else they would not be able to superimpose various lines on top of each toher.

pi, u have to realize one thing. people that go into the business go in AFTER they've learned all this stuff that we're discussing. you cant just go in without knowing anything except a triad and something that sounds sorta scary and expect to be successful. writing 7 minutes a day is NOT difficult. remember, the extensive harmonic vocabulary we are discussing is stuff that you would draw upon. no one writes music thinking hm... now lemme do a Dominant seventh, but actually make it a german 6th so i can modulate down a semitone, before doing a third relation. etcetc. this comes NATURALLY after u learn it. just like when you learn to speak french, u'll start off by thinking of the grammar, if the nouns are masculine or feminine, wats the conjugation, etcetc. but once u can speak it fluently, u dont think a damn about it. Same with music pi. harmony IS a language. there is no other way to put it simply.

Dvorak's 9th. ... really? i dont see the resemblance. i'm sorry. :oops: the shower scene is major 7 chords superimposed... how is that any ways related to the ninth?

correction. thats the way the business is if you are a pop song artist and you want a one hit wonder. knowing more that enough people as well as being in the business, i can tell you that the stubborn way you are suggesting is the recipe for failure. ALL successful composers listen to stuff from the past to improve. and this is not for classical composers only. Film score composers ALSO listen to the past, study past scores. Even successful pop musicians constantly pick up influences fromt he past and other musicians around them. Sadly to say, even Hans Zimmer studies past scores (he loves Wagner for instnace). back to the topic at hand, the jurassic park journey theme is kind of lydianish. it has the qualities ud normally associate with the two major triads a second apart. also, jw loves triads a third apart. viktors theme, imperial march, emperor's theme, etc.

usually its not even a concert version. usually its a cue fromt he movie added to another cue. for example, the schindlers list theme is actually the 2nd last cue on the movie, called placing the stones or soemthing like that. orthe jurassic park 'concert version' is actually the dinosaurs cue.

i dont know exactly what pieces it was, but i do know that she went to the studio recently and recorded some new nbc sports themes for williams. i think its the football one, but i dont know exactly.

i think its kinda sad that I to iv has become overly cliched to become romance. it was originally the transfiguration motif in the Ring. but then everyone loved it and began to overuse it. i wonder which composer was responsible for making that progression into the cliche it is now. prolly korngold. And there are many great uses of the borrowed iv before Wagner's time. ya but the quintessential cadential version is by wagner. imagine sheet music: C D C D E G Ab C E F G G F D C

i didnt mean that motif. there was a analytical study that i read that mentions wagner's association of the plagal cadence (the ii6/5) with the transfiguration idea. its not the motif ur thinking of. i think thats called the transformation motif.

Sorcerer's Stone. What was williams thinking? The same 3 notes Over and OVer and Over. I was hoping he would put in the snaking cello melody here or there but no. its only the Dum dum Da.