Scoring under pressure

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

If only Zimmer scored Hitch's movies. They'd be more effective and emotionally satisfying.

[Smeagol 0]

I'll have to agree with Koray on the "effectiveness" part of his argument in favor of Zimmer.

Is something that Zimmer writes on the same level as, say, any couple of seconds in Prisoner of Azkaban? Never, not in my opinion and quite simply not as a fact.

Zimmer has great ideas every now and then, but he just doesn't know everything that Williams knows and doesn't have all the training that Williams has, and you can tell that by the execution of his (Zimmer's) scores. You can also tell that by the fact that he always needs at least half a dozen guys to score each of his movies. You can love Zimmer over Williams all you want, but that is simply the truth.

NOW, in terms of effectiveness, you just can't argue that the guy has done a great job at writing stuff that is so recognizable that you can't separate the music from the movie it belongs to.

We can cry and imagine all we want what, for example, Silvestri's music would have been for COTBP, but I'll be dammed if what Badelt/Zimmer et al isn't so memorable that it's hard to think of the pirates movies without thinking of the tunes they came up for them.

And on that part of his argument, Koray has a good point. Zimmer's stuff is very effective and serves the movies it belongs to quite well on many cases, and whether the music is or not crap by our personal standards there's no denying that he has written very effective stuff.

And at the end that's all he had to do, that's all he was asked to do.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

When I talk about emotions, I specifically mean something that tugs at you. Herrmann was a genius and master of film music. I'm not denying that, or saying Zimmer is a better composer.

[indy4 155]

Bernard Herrmann would have never been as widely known as he is today IF he started working in the system today. And had he run into Zimmer, he was have physically eviscerated him.

But that's the thing, for the same reason popular opinion doesn't validate HZ as a good composer, musical knowledge doesn't validate Herrmann as a good one. You seem firmly convinced that Zimmer is a bad composer--not in your opinion, but just as a general fact. You look down on those that enjoy his music. I agree with you that just because something is popular, it doesn't mean it is good. But just because something is technically sufficient (though there really isn't even a way to measure this), it doesn't mean it is good. And who says music is only meant to be enjoyed by those learned in the ways of music? You may be able to make a list of a hundred reasons why Zimmer's music technically sucks, but if it brings joy to so many people (as you have admitted that he is popular), can you really say it's bad? And then there's the issue that we don't even know for sure if HZ's stuff is technical lacking from a musician's viewpoint because 1) that's impossible to measure and 2) we've only really seen you and a few others arguing to feverently against HZ, and while the group of musically learned people on JWFan are just as legitimate as any other musically learned person, they do not represent everybody.

And you can ignore all that stuff about how Zimmer's a bad person, or how if he was truly a good composer he would be humble, as you seem to worship Bernard Herrmann, who clearly wasn't the nicest fellow to be around. We've seen examples of how Zimmer was sorta a jerk to Julian Nott, but this just proves he made be morally crooked, not necessarily musically crooked. And I don't see how you can gather that Zimmer uses his students to compose when he is unable to from that email, that seems more of an assumption you've made with no basis. If you have more evidence, I'd be more than willing to reconsider my position, but from the stuff you've presented I don't see how you've even come close to proving that Zimmer is a bad composer.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Hans Zimmer's father was member of the Hitler Jugend, did you know that Koray?

[Nick Parker 3,040]

Was John Williams rushed in any way to write what little he did (apparently 40 minutes if I read you guys correctly) for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets?

[David Coscina 4]

Koray, we're done here. We must agree to disagree.

I will say one thing about the Media Ventures thing- read my entire post. I explain why I refuted your initial charge. Because I emailed Zimmer once back in 1992. If that is "applying" than yeah, you got me. I never sent him music, nor did I ever get to a stage where there was any consideration of my skills for his use. That quote you found was an illustration to the fact that he's not some altruistic guy much as you'd like him to be. He throws out this "I;m giving untapped talent opportunities" to pat himself on the back. John Powell revealed in a recent interview that he'd scored hundreds of radio and television spots before meeting Zimmer. He already had a music career. So did everyone else he hired. He just wanted guys who were under the radar enough to work for him and help him write his own scores. But he played the odds- he certainly did not hire anyone whose demos just blew him away- he went with guys who had professional experience already.

But you're right about one thing- opinions are opinions. I cannot change your opinion about Zimmer nor can I attempt to explain something as rationally as I can because you're still going to have this delusion that I'm sour grapes because Zimmer never gave me a shot. that's how you read into what I have written. Frankly, you can believe whatever you like. I called you a jerk-off because you called me stupid. Tit for tat. Action and reaction.

However, I will say that when you couch your opinion, you seem to articulate it as fact coming from someone very knowledgeable. As far as I can tell, you have no experience in scoring films, music composition or music theory. You also seem to have a very limited understanding of the history of film scoring if you don't even know who Bernard Herrmann is. So, I guess your arrogance just pisses me off and once in a while, I just have to tell you that.

But I'm sure you'll have some superb pithy retort that will undoubtedly be as vacuous as most of your posts.

indy4, I honestly think you are reading into it. I do not believe I "look down" on people who like Zimmer's music. Where do I say "person Z is an idiot for liking Zimmer's music". I do attack those at RC but I'm sure they could not give a crap. No I think the real issue here is that whenever someone challenges the integrity of Zimmer and co. music, you Zimmer lovers get all insecure and fight back by challenging or insulting those who put their opinions forth. I will never understand how talking about people who will NEVER read this forum ellicits reprisals of a personal nature back. Are you and Koray secretly hired to stand up for Zimmer when he's not looking? There's many forum members here that abhor MV-RC music. If you don't like it, why not start a Zimmer fan club. Surely your devout worship of his music would be better served at a place where you would be surrounded by like minded people. This is a John Williams forum and everything that his music encompasses and imbues is about the very best that music can be, both emotionally and cerebrally. I'm not sure how Zimmer figures into the equation here.

[Joe Brausam 215]

But just because something is technically sufficient (though there really isn't even a way to measure this), it doesn't mean it is good. And who says music is only meant to be enjoyed by those learned in the ways of music? You may be able to make a list of a hundred reasons why Zimmer's music technically sucks, but if it brings joy to so many people (as you have admitted that he is popular), can you really say it's bad? And then there's the issue that we don't even know for sure if HZ's stuff is technical lacking from a musician's viewpoint because 1) that's impossible to measure and 2) we've only really seen you and a few others arguing to feverently against HZ, and while the group of musically learned people on JWFan are just as legitimate as any other musically learned person, they do not represent everybody.

It can actually be very easily measured just how technically achieved a piece of music is. It is obvious to tell if something is lacking anything beyond an intermediate knowledge of musical theory. The music would be simple, clumsy at times. Simple progressions. Weak modulations. Give a sheet of Zimmer's music to any seriously trained musician and there would be plenty to criticize.

A disregard for any sort of musical form is often seen in film music today. What sort of form have we heard in Zimmer's music (amongst other current composers)? Just because you have to fit to the film doesn't mean you can't write something in simple sonata form at the least! Rozsa would very frequently write fugues into chase scenes in his scores. Herrmann obviously felt strongly enough about the quality of his music to use some of it in his opera. Williams seems a fan of writing scherzi.

Any of the above, amongst other things, can be a certain measure of just how much technical skill a composer like Zimmer has.

[Smeagol 0]

And then there's the issue that we don't even know for sure if HZ's stuff is technical lacking from a musician's viewpoint because 1) that's impossible to measure

I'll have to disagree here. Yes, it is possible to measure. There are centuries of information and development of western music to measure Zimmer's technical abilities against. You can love Zimmer over Williams, Goldsmith or whoever all you want, but there's just no solid argument for anyone to say that Zimmer is well-versed in the technicalities of Harmony, counterpoint, orchestration, blah, blah, blah. He just doesn't have the training, and that's a fact you just can't deny.

It is true that that is not all that it takes to get the job done. Look at Horner, the guy has more musical training than Zimmer ever will, but he's still been (arguably) dry as a composer for years. But I repeat, in terms of effectiveness, yes, Zimmer definitely has good ideas flowing through his brain, and that IMO is undeniable as well.

Damn... it is late and I feel like i'm not making any sense anymore..

[Koray Savas 2,251]

We've seen examples of how Zimmer was sorta a jerk to Julian Nott, but this just proves he made be morally crooked, not necessarily musically crooked.

What examples? An anonymous, reworked and reedited quote? Julian Nott nor Hans Zimmer were involved with Chicken Run. I assume he was talking about Wallace & Gromit. But it goes to show it isn't reliable.

However, I will say that when you couch your opinion, you seem to articulate it as fact coming from someone very knowledgeable. As far as I can tell, you have no experience in scoring films, music composition or music theory. You also seem to have a very limited understanding of the history of film scoring if you don't even know who Bernard Herrmann is. So, I guess your arrogance just pisses me off and once in a while, I just have to tell you that.

I've never expressed myself as musically knowledgeable or literate, and I don't see how that is relevant in anything we've been debating, since I am not arguing the technical efficiency of his music in terms of education. I just take what I've seen from interviews and read from articles (not just involving Zimmer but what you like to call them ghost writers or cronies. They have names, they are people), and credits (in film and CD). I know who Bernard Herrmann is, I'm not an idiot.

Excuse me while I continue listening to The Thin Red Line.

[David Coscina 4]

Was John Williams rushed in any way to write what little he did (apparently 40 minutes if I read you guys correctly) for Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets?

It's common knowledge that he wrote the entire score but did not want to slight Ross's name or efforts so he just took the additional music credit. now that is class.

And then there's the issue that we don't even know for sure if HZ's stuff is technical lacking from a musician's viewpoint because 1) that's impossible to measure

I'll have to disagree here. Yes, it is possible to measure. There are centuries of information and development of western music to measure Zimmer's technical abilities against. You can love Zimmer over Williams, Goldsmith or whoever all you want, but there's just no solid argument for anyone to say that Zimmer is well-versed in the technicalities of Harmony, counterpoint, orchestration, blah, blah, blah. He just doesn't have the training, and that's a fact you just can't deny.

It is true that that is not all that it takes to get the job done. Look at Horner, the guy has more musical training than Zimmer ever will, but he's still been (arguably) dry as a composer for years. But I repeat, in terms of effectiveness, yes, Zimmer definitely has good ideas flowing through his brain, and that IMO is undeniable as well.

Damn... it is late and I feel like i'm not making any sense anymore..

God bless you Smeagol. I could not have said it better.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

It's common knowledge that he wrote the entire score but did not want to slight Ross's name or efforts so he just took the additional music credit. now that is class.

Really? Apparently, there is a lot of music adapted from the first score, or so I have been told. That was John Williams' decision, then?

[Koray Savas 2,251]

It's common knowledge that he wrote the entire score but did not want to slight Ross's name or efforts so he just took the additional music credit. now that is class.

I fail to see the additional music credit:

[David Coscina 4]

It's common knowledge that he wrote the entire score but did not want to slight Ross's name or efforts so he just took the additional music credit. now that is class.

Really? Apparently, there is a lot of music adapted from the first score, or so I have been told. That was John Williams' decision, then?

I have not heard the score in a while but I don't recall a whole lot of adapted music in the same manner that Ken Thorne used for Superman 2.

It's common knowledge that he wrote the entire score but did not want to slight Ross's name or efforts so he just took the additional music credit. now that is class.

I fail to see the additional music credit:

My mistake. All I know is that what Ross did do on the project was unsatisfactory to the filmmakers so Williams came in and did everything. I guess what I meant to say is that while Ross did work on it, nothing he did ended up being used in the film, but Williams still insisted that he get credit.

[Nick Parker 3,040]

I need to find one of king mark's post to settle this matter....

Ross is quick to give all credit for the CHAMBER OF SECRETS music to John Williams. Ross did not compose any new material himself; everything he wrote was based on John's material.

So William Ross did do something for the score, he just did not contribute any original material. Nothing from the article suggests that he wrote unsatisfactory music that John Williams replaced, or anything of the sort.

[David Coscina 4]

I need to find one of king mark's post to settle this matter....

Ross is quick to give all credit for the CHAMBER OF SECRETS music to John Williams. Ross did not compose any new material himself; everything he wrote was based on John's material.

So William Ross did do something for the score, he just did not contribute any original material. Nothing from the article suggests that he wrote unsatisfactory music that John Williams replaced, or anything of the sort.

my mistake. sorry.

[Hlao-roo 389]

With regard to "class" as far as bending over backward to give credit to others, I would hold up Goldsmith, rather than Williams, as exemplary. Despite doing fairly minimal and mostly nominal orchestrating, Goldsmith's orchestrator is always credited in the album liner notes; Williams's rarely is in the soundtrack releases he produces (the only exception I can think of offhand is Nixon). I understand Williams's position on the matter ("They get credit in the film, but the music itself is my baby") but don't think it justifies leaving off the name of a nonetheless important and necessary collaborator.

[Incanus 5,723]

It's common knowledge that he wrote the entire score but did not want to slight Ross's name or efforts so he just took the additional music credit. now that is class.

I fail to see the additional music credit:

Ross did not compose additional music but adapted some of Williams' original pieces from HPPS because of the time constraints and conducted the recording sessions. He is credited more than amply for his work. And JW ended up being much more involved with the scoring than he anticipated.

With regard to "class" as far as bending over backward to give credit to others, I would hold up Goldsmith, rather than Williams, as exemplary. Despite doing fairly minimal and mostly nominal orchestrating, Goldsmith's orchestrator is always credited in the album liner notes; Williams's rarely is in the soundtrack releases he produces (the only exception I can think of offhand is Nixon). I understand Williams's position on the matter ("They get credit in the film, but the music itself is my baby") but don't think it justifies leaving off the name of a nonetheless important and necessary collaborator.

Well Williams has made his point about it (or his orchestrators rather). You can call it professional pride, arrogance or what ever. Orchestrators really know in what kind of business they are in. They work in the background. I guess JW gives the credit to his orchestrators personally and acknowledges them in the film credits but feels strongly about the authorship of his music when it is released on the album. And he has been very consistent with this. Even old Herbert Spencer got credit very rarely on the album credits.

[Mr. Breathmask 555]

POTC: TCOTBP

Yes, and the end result is about as musically interesting as that acronym is pronounceable.

Just because it uses synths doesn't make it a bad score.

I bet you'd love it if John Williams or Jerry Goldsmith had written it.

Toss.

I never mentioned anything about synths, nor does it really bother me when listening to Curse of the Black Pearl in its entirety (which I can't bring myself to doing anymore). The synth additions are part of the score's architecture. However, when a track comes up on shuffle in iTunes, I've wondered several times if I wasn't listening to a demo of something.

But what really bothers me is the blunt simplicity of the music. There's no proper counterpoint that I can find and what goes for harmony in this score is pretty much just 100 people playing the same damn thing all at once. It's the most simplistic music played simultaneously by as many instruments and as loud as possible to make it sound as if it actually has some weight behind it.

Thankfully, the two sequels were a lot better. At World's End is a pretty good score, actually.

Oh, and play nice now, you lot.

[Richard Penna 3,716]

Yeah, AWE was a pleasant surprise, and I've read that there were almost no synths in the final score in the film.

DMC on the other hand is more unlistenable to me than TCotBP. Zimmer's attempt to merge a traditional score with those guitars and the whole rock music approach just didn't work for me.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

I won't argue with the simplicity of it. Zimmer does write simple themes, but I don't have a problem with that.

[indy4 155]

indy4, I honestly think you are reading into it. I do not believe I "look down" on people who like Zimmer's music. Where do I say "person Z is an idiot for liking Zimmer's music". I do attack those at RC but I'm sure they could not give a crap. No I think the real issue here is that whenever someone challenges the integrity of Zimmer and co. music, you Zimmer lovers get all insecure and fight back by challenging or insulting those who put their opinions forth. I will never understand how talking about people who will NEVER read this forum ellicits reprisals of a personal nature back. Are you and Koray secretly hired to stand up for Zimmer when he's not looking? There's many forum members here that abhor MV-RC music. If you don't like it, why not start a Zimmer fan club. Surely your devout worship of his music would be better served at a place where you would be surrounded by like minded people. This is a John Williams forum and everything that his music encompasses and imbues is about the very best that music can be, both emotionally and cerebrally. I'm not sure how Zimmer figures into the equation here.

Whoa whoa whoa--back up. I'm not the one telling people to jerk off. I'm not the one calling anyone an asshole. I'm certainly not the one taking things personally here. I offered my opinion on the subject and I was attacked for being hired to stand up for Zimmer, etc. I gave an opinion and you lambasted me...I don't think I'm the one taking things personally. I suppose I'm not supposed to do that? I am terribly sorry, in the future I will only speak if I have something good to stay about John Williams. Please forgive me.

It can actually be very easily measured just how technically achieved a piece of music is. It is obvious to tell if something is lacking anything beyond an intermediate knowledge of musical theory. The music would be simple, clumsy at times. Simple progressions. Weak modulations. Give a sheet of Zimmer's music to any seriously trained musician and there would be plenty to criticize.

A disregard for any sort of musical form is often seen in film music today. What sort of form have we heard in Zimmer's music (amongst other current composers)? Just because you have to fit to the film doesn't mean you can't write something in simple sonata form at the least! Rozsa would very frequently write fugues into chase scenes in his scores. Herrmann obviously felt strongly enough about the quality of his music to use some of it in his opera. Williams seems a fan of writing scherzi.

Any of the above, amongst other things, can be a certain measure of just how much technical skill a composer like Zimmer has.

Okay, so how would you measure simplicity, clumsiness, weakness...? You can't.

Anyway, this wasn't my main point. My main point was that even if his music is technically inferior, it has brought joy to so many people, so can it really be "bad" music? Technicalities are something that only musicians would really notice. What makes their opinions more valid than the average person? Since when is music meant to be enjoyed only by those with an understanding of it?

[Koray Savas 2,251]

Don't you get it indy4? If the entire industry likes him he can't possibly be any good at what he does.

[Richard Penna 3,716]

Williams' music is technically amazing most of the time, and yet a lot of it can send you to sleep, if you pick whichever out of the less respected scores you happen to find boring.

Much of Zimmer's music is very simplistic, but heck, I get a kick out of it sometimes, and isn't that what music's about. Take the moment near the end of Do You Think I'm Saxon? from King Arthur (or, since I only have some cues from the recording sessions, it's the one in the Back to Hadrian's Wall alternates), there's a very positive melody in the strings and brass that blew me away when I first heard it and me me feel good. Yes, the endless layers bothered me a bit, but it made me feel something.

[Joni Wiljami 1,206]

People , calm down.

[Richard Penna 3,716]

I don't need calming.

Even Joey doesn't annoy me any more

[Koray Savas 2,251]

[Unlucky Bastard 7,782]

The Simpsons Movie = Zimmer outside of his comfort zone = better score.

[Smeagol 0]

Okay, so how would you measure simplicity, clumsiness, weakness...? You can't.

Anyway, this wasn't my main point. My main point was that even if his music is technically inferior, it has brought joy to so many people, so can it really be "bad" music? Technicalities are something that only musicians would really notice. What makes their opinions more valid than the average person? Since when is music meant to be enjoyed only by those with an understanding of it?

Yes you can. And that was my point in the post I wrote above. Look, if today I decided to compete in the design of a skyscraper with an architect, I might do a pretty damn good job, and maybe my mommy and my friends and neighbors will think that my design is better and prettier than the one designed by the architect, but that does not make me a better trained architect, it doesn't make me a better architect.

If you went and actually try to get my design built, any seriously trained architect will see that my design is clumsy, weak and simple.

I'll agree with you that it can't really be "bad" music. Hell, I effing love The Holiday, so I'm one of the ones whose Zimmer's music has brought joy to. And as much as I love Elfman, I don't live my days wondering what would have happened IF someone else scored the new Batman movies. I got what I got, and I enjoy it for what it is, and I enjoy it a lot.

And music (just like anything else) was never meant to be enjoyed only by those who understand it, BUT, just like with anything else, if you are a bit informed about it, you might enjoy it even more. I hate American Football, I have no idea what it is about and have never enjoyed watching it, but at the same time, I've never tried to understand it or learn more about it, and that's my fault, not the sport's. If I tried, I'm sure I'd probably appreciate it more, I might even get to enjoy it.

And I think that's the main point a lot of people are trying to make here, some in more articulate posts than others. You don't have to know about the technical aspects of music to enjoy it, but nobody can't deny that with a little effort to try to understand the basics, you'll also get to appreciate how music is constructed better.

Can you imagine what Zimmer's music would be like if he knew how to modulate to distant keys? If he knew how to use a bit more elaborate surface harmonies? If he could execute his ideas with the knowledge that any of the better trained composer has?

That's the point. But don't go around saying that you can't measure weak and simplistic musical constructions. That's like saying that you can't really say that Mahler is better than the Backstreet boys, because you can't compare the quality of one or the other. Or like saying that Avril Lavigne is better than Stravinsky because she has brought more joy to teenage boys/girls than Igor has.

[David Coscina 4]

I think Smeagol eloquently summed it up perfectly. I really like the architect analogy too because it really comes down to that, at least from the technical POV. Sure, aesthetically, anyone can derive enjoyment from anything but if this ideology was prevelant from day 1, we would have had no development of a music system whose fruits we enjoy today.

I wish I could keep a cool head about this particular subject matter but I'm too close to it.

[Ollie 1,061]

Akira Ifukube had very little time to compose some of his scores to Godzilla and various monster/sci-fi films.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,070]

Or like saying that Avril Lavigne is better than Stravinsky because she has brought more joy to teenage boys/girls than Igor has.

The ye olde classical composers would make the same comments about Stravinsky if they had lived to be 200 years old. What's your point Smeagol?

Every generation has its elitists that look down on what they consider a lesser art form. You like Stravinsky? You've picked up on the material Beethoven and Mozart would see as popular sh*t. Would it be because Stravinsky was less skilled? No, but because they could not appreciate Stravinsky's thinking. They would not understand his language.

So again, I ask what's your point?

A telephone book can be as magnificent as Romeo and Juliet. Once you realize that, you will understand what art really is. It is all a matter of taste, association and a willingness to set aside preconceived notions. I hate rap, and yet I have seen rap artists come up with complex rhythmic ideas that not even Beethoven could dream of.

Stop being arrogant snobs.

[Quintus 5,399]

I won't argue with the simplicity of it. Zimmer does write simple themes, but I don't have a problem with that.

I remember listening to a John Williams concert performed by The Youth LSO on Classic FM a few years ago and I remember their brilliant Superman encore at the end. Afterwards, some of the players gave short interviews in which they expressed their enjoyment at playing under the direction of JW and how they liked his music.

I remember very clearly a young male violinist stating how simplistic the music appeared on paper and how simple it was to actually play, but he was amazed by the physical sound of it being played - it surprised him that he found it so satisfying to perform.

[publicist 4,643]

Can you imagine what Zimmer's music would be like if he knew how to modulate to distant keys? If he knew how to use a bit more elaborate surface harmonies? If he could execute his ideas with the knowledge that any of the better trained composer has?

That's the point. But don't go around saying that you can't measure weak and simplistic musical constructions.

Problem is, all of this applies only to Zimmer writing vaguely epic Hollywood style music. He has written in a lot of other idioms with different requirements, i. e. pop, rock, fusion, country etc.

And we all know how it sounds if better trained composers start to write songs and pop...better key modulation and more wicked harmonization aside, it mostly sucks.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,070]

Again, there is this very irritating level of elitism in the more formally trained segment of the music industry, and it's developed out of the simple fact that with so much complexity and variety in music today, formal training has gone the way side. Rather than realizing it's not the tool that matters but what you do with it, a lot of the formally trained ladies and gentlemen have adopted the, we're superior, only we can write serious music, etc. etc.

It's utter bull. Ironically they've adopted music that used to be frowned upon as dumb and stupid as now being intelligent.

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

[David Coscina 4]

Or like saying that Avril Lavigne is better than Stravinsky because she has brought more joy to teenage boys/girls than Igor has.

The ye olde classical composers would make the same comments about Stravinsky if they had lived to be 200 years old. What's your point Smeagol?

Every generation has its elitists that look down on what they consider a lesser art form. You like Stravinsky? You've picked up on the material Beethoven and Mozart would see as popular sh*t.

So again, what's your point?

A telephone book can be as magnificent as Romeo and Juliet. Once you realize that, you will understand what art really is.

You're coming at this from a philosophical standpoint, and from that stance, you can reduce everything to being subjective- even one's own existence (existentialism and epistemological ideologies). That's a terrific way of side-stepping the issue though. When you play the "it's all subjective card" than we basically should choose never to have a dialogue in terms of more objective empiricism. Why bother since Smeagol can bring up very solid and salient points to support his stance and all that will happen is that he'll get your response which is infallible because you contextualize it in the veil of subjectivity.

Whether you wish to accept it or not, music is a system of principles and rules and regardless of the inspiration of the composer, knowing more about this system allows them to externalize their ideas more clearly. That really is the difference between composers and hobbyists. I have no doubt that someone untrained in music could hear a beautiful music piece in their heads because they may have the latent innate music abilities. But if they do not possess the faculties to develop these ideas, the end result is a disconnect between inspiration and creation. This is where these fundamental principles come in.

[publicist 4,643]

Whether you wish to accept it or not, music is a system of principles and rules and regardless of the inspiration of the composer, knowing more about this system allows them to externalize their ideas more clearly. That really is the difference between composers and hobbyists.

Again, only applies to specific idioms. In others, it can be a hindrance.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,070]

Whether you wish to accept it or not, music is a system of principles and rules and regardless of the inspiration of the composer, knowing more about this system allows them to externalize their ideas more clearly. That really is the difference between composers and hobbyists. I have no doubt that someone untrained in music could hear a beautiful music piece in their heads because they may have the latent innate music abilities. But if they do not possess the faculties to develop these ideas, the end result is a disconnect between inspiration and creation. This is where these fundamental principles come in.

You are still approaching it from the narrow perspective of someone trained in western classical theory. Broaden your perspectives. Recognize that 90% of music is what the listener brings to it.

Moonlight sonata would be a meaningless arrangement of notes to tribe of Egba. It would communicate NO ideas. When colonists and explorers first arrived in Africa, they heard certain tribes music, and dismissed it as being low-brow and foolish. 250 years later, scientists studied the mathematical foundations that these tribes were using in their music and found them to be too complex and alien for the colonists to even be able to break down into anything other than random noise. Their ears were simply not attenuated to what they were hearing, and as a result it sounded like nothing to them.

Just last year a study was published that showed that people from each decade had extremely different ideas of what sophisticated music was. Amongst scholars of western music, there was a significant difference in what was recognized as sophisticated music. Because each generation had their neurons that processed music wired differently. As a result in the process of creating efficiency, the brain would literally drop certain signals and compensate in other ways to structure the music for the individual. As a result some people heard things in music other simply could not.

I'm not discussing subjectivity, I'm discussing science. There are PHYSICAL limitations to what each and every person can process when it comes to music.

[Quintus 5,399]

So how do you explain how I like their bongo music?

[David Coscina 4]

Again, there is this very irritating level of elitism in the more formally trained segment of the music industry, and it's developed out of the simple fact that with so much complexity and variety in music today, formal training has gone the way side. Rather than realizing it's not the tool that matters but what you do with it, a lot of the formally trained ladies and gentlemen have adopted the, we're superior, only we can write serious music, etc. etc.

It's utter bull. Ironically they've adopted music that used to be frowned upon as dumb and stupid as now being intelligent.

Those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

Hey if the elitist title equals my insistence that there are examples of fine craftsmanship in the arts. specifically music composition, then I will happily wave that banner proudly.

I'm not sure when it become popular to strive for mediocrity but just recently John Debney asked the same thing in Facebook and received many accolades by fellow composers and fans alike.

[Quintus 5,399]

Hey if the elitist title equals my insistence that there are examples of fine craftsmanship in the arts. specifically music composition, then I will happily wave that banner proudly.

And yet I bet it really gets your back up when the classical elitists laugh at film music and specifically, John Williams film music.

[David Coscina 4]

Akira Ifukube had very little time to compose some of his scores to Godzilla and various monster/sci-fi films.

God bless you Mark!

[Williamsfan301 11]

Isn't it time for a colorful metaphor?

[David Coscina 4]

Hey if the elitist title equals my insistence that there are examples of fine craftsmanship in the arts. specifically music composition, then I will happily wave that banner proudly.

And yet I bet it really gets your back up when the classical elitists laugh at film music and specifically, John Williams film music.

It does a little but they don't really understand the system. I know this seems like I'm contradicting myself- because in some ways I am.

As far as Williams is concerned with classical snobs, I would just say that we're dealing (actually) with the same personality type in cases of elitism and ignorance. Both have it set in their heads about something and will not entertain other perspectives (usually because of a lack of breadth of knowledge on the topic at hand).

I'm not asking that people dislike Zimmer and co. because they don't write music as complex as Williams. I'm just hoping for some understanding on why people like Smeagol and myself (among others on this forum) do not find MV-RC output as fulfilling as Williams and his generation. It's an attempt to explain and articulate, not to demean.

There was some guy in my college residence who HATED Williams because he stole off of classical composers. This same guy had no tolerance for anything outside his limited spectrum of listening tastes. I was not upset with him because

1. it was his loss if he could not see outside his limited realm

2. he knew very little about the film scoring world and what the process was all about

Now, I listen to everything from Linkin Park to Mahler to John Coltrane to Tool to whatever. Heck, I even watch American Idol. but I can differentiate levels of technical merit in each of these artists. It does not negate my enjoyment of their music. But I can exist on that plain of greater objectivity.

Oh, also, some of you guys have a rather skewed understanding of classical composers. Mozart actually saw Beethoven perform as a 16 year old. Mahler lauded Erich Korngold (and Schoenberg). It stands to chance that Beethoven would have been fascinated by Stravinsky's use of harmony and rhythmic idioms in The Rite of Spring rather than summarily dismiss it as crap. I have an interesting compilation of composers' memoirs from the Baroque to Romantic periods. Yeah there were some friendly (and not so friendly) rivalries but there was also respect.

[Quintus 5,399]

I would just say that we're dealing (actually) with the same personality type in cases of elitism and ignorance. Both have it set in their heads about something and will not entertain other perspectives

Sounds familiar...

2. he knew very little about the film scoring world and what the process was all about

Ultimately, I don't think an understanding of the film scoring process matters a single iota when judging its merit as respectable, intellectual and entertaining music.

I'm just hoping for some understanding on why people like Smeagol and myself (among others on this forum) do not find MV-RC output as fulfilling as Williams and his generation.

I don't find MV stuff as fulfilling as Williams and his peers either, but I do like a lot of Hans Zimmer stuff. I don't bother with anything else from the MV establishment because I find it uninteresting, up to now.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

A lot of the smaller scores to come out of RCP are actually quite good. I think Steve Jablonsky is really the only generic one with no style. Geoff Zanelli, Trevor Morris, and especially Jim Dooley all compose some pretty enjoyable tunes.

[BLUMENKOHL 1,070]

The only RCP composer I appreciate is Zimmer...and that's for scores like Da Vinci Code, Frost/Nixon, Prince of Egypt, Crimson Tide, Backdraft, Beyond Rangoon. The more...subdued works.

[Joe Brausam 215]

Oh, also, some of you guys have a rather skewed understanding of classical composers. Mozart actually saw Beethoven perform as a 16 year old. Mahler lauded Erich Korngold (and Schoenberg). It stands to chance that Beethoven would have been fascinated by Stravinsky's use of harmony and rhythmic idioms in The Rite of Spring rather than summarily dismiss it as crap. I have an interesting compilation of composers' memoirs from the Baroque to Romantic periods. Yeah there were some friendly (and not so friendly) rivalries but there was also respect.

Beethoven himself was on a track that would have brought him to what Stravinsky's output was, had he lived longer.

[Koray Savas 2,251]

The only RCP composer I appreciate is Zimmer...and that's for scores like Da Vinci Code, Frost/Nixon, Prince of Egypt, Crimson Tide, Backdraft, Beyond Rangoon. The more...subdued works.

All very good scores.

Are you familiar at all with the lesser composers? Or are you just not interested?

[Luke Skywalker 1,799]

Williams supposedly 'struggled' during the writting of munich.