Diagnosing harm

[ETMuz 3]

I have enjoyed learning from alot of you JWFanners here. I don't post much but I am a lover of harmonically rich music. I have spent my last 6 or 7 years or so trying come up with the best system of understanding exactly what I am hearing(such as minor 7(b5) etc. That is why I try to diagnose music that I love. I understand harm in a deeper way when I hear the quality of the chord symbol I am looking at. I love big rich chords which is what drew me to JW many years ago. I remember hearing his work and knowing that this dude can play some piano I know! I still struggle sometimes knowing exactly what to call certain chords as it may not be as simple as C7(#11). I guess I am just more used to playing jazz than understanding how the classical analyzers look at things. My question is do you think that Mr. Williams ever puts down chord qualities in his sketches? atleast in the early part of his creations? Or do you think its all notation writing as he is doing it? I have seen a John Powell score where he had the chord quality in the music and I really enjoyed looking at it one time through like that. Just wondering how many of you are like I am and do you have your own system of diagnosing complex chords? I am currently about to start Music Theory III and I am trying to figure out how much I need to dive into figured bass or if thats not the way to go to analyze someone complex like williams. 

 

Really sorry if my post if unfocused. I love this topic and there is not a more interesting mind to try to figure out than that of John Towner in my book.

 

Daniel

 

 

[Jurassic Shark 12,091]

Great topic for a thread! I'm sure @Ludwig and @Falstaft (and others) have insightful replies to you.

[ETMuz 3]

33 minutes ago, Jurassic Shark said:

Great topic for a thread! I'm sure @Ludwig and @Falstaft (and others) have insightful replies to you.

Cool! Look forward to it!

[Datameister 2,044]

Williams' sketches and scores don't normally use any sort of chord notation unless it's idiomatic for the music being written - if there's guitar in the score, for instance, you can bet there will be chords written in. Nothing fancy, just the normal sorts of chord notations you'd find in any lead sheet. But for traditional orchestral scoring, no, there usually isn't a need to write in the chord symbols...and as you've noticed, it can be quite difficult to describe some of his harmonies this way anyhow.

[Falstaft 2,132]

This is a great question, @ETMuz. Our access to Williams's sketches is limited -- even in this era of score scans and leaks. But from what we have seen, Williams writes out everything meticulously, including full chord-voicings. The exception, as @Datameister says, is instruments within source cues where chord symbols are idiomatically appropriate -- the guitar parts in the Canto Bight in TLJ & revised Victory Celebration in ROTJ, or the source cues from Superman come to mind. In those cases though, the harmony tends to be pretty simple and therefore easy to translate into chord symbols.

 

Most of JW's pitch design is considerably more complex than this, and often either not strictly tertian or highly linear in nature. Figured bass would be useful in some cases, sure, but that system has its own advantages and disadvantages. The richness off Williams's harmonic vocabulary creates an interesting challenge when trying to account for his sonorities with simple labels. It's something I confront regularly with my thematic reductions.

 

Here's a few illustrative cases that I grappled with from Indiana Jones.

 

• Sometimes there's no ambiguity, and chord symbols work just fine, like with the Medallion theme:

 

 

 

• Sometimes the chordal language is clear but the bass-line or an internal countermelody is sufficiently independent to warrant depiction in spots too, like with TLC Nazi theme:

 

• Sometimes one can boil a dissonant chord down to a technically accurate but rather unsatisfying or non-definitive chord symbol, like with the [C#-E-A-C-D#-G#] pentachord that undergirds Panama Hat's motif. An alternative label could be a polychordal Ab | A/C#, I suppose. Really, the best way to understand it is an A-minor chord sandwiched between a bass Db and melodic Ab, with a spicy D# lurking in the middle.

 

 

• Williams's penchant for quartal and/or sus-chord harmonizations can really scramble chord symbol notation too, like with this auxiliary motif from TLC:

 

 

• And then sometimes, the music is so dissonant or manifestly non-tertian that I throw up my hands and just put in the needed chord tones in the reduction. Chord symbols were never designed to deal with music like the B-section of Call of the Crystal, for example:

 

 

 

Incidentally, if this kind of stuff interests you, the piano album for Saving Private Ryan might be a worthwhile purchase: unusually for these sorts of reduced scores, it includes chord symbols for pretty much everything except the most irreducibly linear moments, and it contains essentially the entire score minus a single cue.

[Fabulin 3,515]

2 hours ago, Falstaft said:

 

• Williams's penchant for quartal and/or sus-chord harmonizations can really scramble chord symbol notation too, like with this auxiliary motif from TLC:

 

That's a very interesting track in general. Do you have an idea what happens harmonically in the 3:06-3:36 section?

 

[ETMuz 3]

@Falstaft, thank you for your time and most excellent reply with great examples!! Nice work on your reductions too! You hit the nail on the head in several of your points and you made me laugh at:

2 hours ago, Falstaft said:

the music is so dissonant or manifestly non-tertian that I throw up my hands and just put in the needed chord tones in the reduction

 

I guess that B section is like I read one time in jazz book that said "try to think pool of notes, and not so much chord". That statement made me think and analyze music in a different way. 

 

You are ahead of me in the effort to reduce and label the harmony that is encompassed in the music. In many cases you are so right where you just can't call it a chord without it looking ridiculous. 

 

You are so right!

3 hours ago, Falstaft said:

• Williams's penchant for quartal and/or sus-chord harmonizations can really scramble chord symbol notation too, like with this auxiliary motif from TLC:

 

 

 

I would love to collaborate on something like this with you or anyone that likes to do this kind of analyzing. Is there a thread dedicated to something like this that we could share reductions? Is there a particular piece of his music that you have not gotten to that you would like me to try? I use Sibelius. 

 

 

[Falstaft 2,132]

39 minutes ago, Fabulin said:

That's a very interesting track in general. Do you have an idea what happens harmonically in the 3:06-3:36 section?

 

 

 

Ooh, what a great moment! Definitely not something you would ever try to convey with chord symbols.

 

Just quickly, using my ears, I hear a sustained C5 tremolando (maybe C5/C#5) in the strings throughout, and a series of high parallel tritones in string harmonics starting at 3:10, with a "melody" that slides from A6-D7-...E7-D7-C#7-E7-D7-C7. There's a low piano cluster and gong (?) at 3:14, with Eb2 sounding particularly clear to me. The low C2 pedal arrives at 3:32, with some faint, probably somewhat ad-libbed string harmonic glissandi there too, right before the poor goon gets decapitated. 

[ETMuz 3]

Spot on. Definitely using the tri-tone up high. You have a good ear  

[Falstaft 2,132]

3 hours ago, ETMuz said:

@Falstaft, thank you for your time and most excellent reply with great examples!! Nice work on your reductions too! You hit the nail on the head in several of your points and you made me laugh at:

 

I would love to collaborate on something like this with you or anyone that likes to do this kind of analyzing. Is there a thread dedicated to something like this that we could share reductions? Is there a particular piece of his music that you have not gotten to that you would like me to try? I use Sibelius. 

 

 

 

Thanks! It's a labor of love, I'm sure you understand!

 

I use Sibelius too, though I'm old fashioned and haven't upgraded since Sib 5.

 

I'd think the natural next franchise to tackle, one that's richly thematic enough to be interesting, would be Harry Potter. But honestly, the thought of working through any of the post-Williams HP scores, which for me range from mediocre to abominable, is too depressing for me to commit. For non-Williams: the How to Train Your Dragon series would be really rewarding; the website FilmScoreFans has done a nice melodic guide, but harmony doesn't seem to be indicated yet.

[ETMuz 3]

I haven't upgraded since the release of Sibelius 7. I got it through the college music dept that I work for. I arrange music for some of our performing groups at the college, among doing other things in the music dept. 

 

I'm down with trying some potter stuff. I certainly want it to be worth the effort since it can be a little time consuming. we can take our time  Just let me know if you want. I sent you a PM. 

 

[Fabulin 3,515]

6 hours ago, Falstaft said:

Ooh, what a great moment! Definitely not something you would ever try to convey with chord symbols.

 

Just quickly, using my ears, I hear a sustained C5 tremolando (maybe C5/C#5) in the strings throughout, and a series of high parallel tritones in string harmonics starting at 3:10, with a "melody" that slides from A6-D7-...E7-D7-C#7-E7-D7-C7. There's a low piano cluster and gong (?) at 3:14, with Eb2 sounding particularly clear to me. The low C2 pedal arrives at 3:32, with some faint, probably somewhat ad-libbed string harmonic glissandi there too, right before the poor goon gets decapitated. 

I am not sure if I understand "parallel tritones" correctly. Does it mean that for example the first violins play the (two octaves up) artificial harmonics, sounding close to their highest register (E7), while the second violins play the harmonics a tritone lower, doubling the melody with a G#6-...A#6-G#6-G6-A#6-G#6-F#6 sequence?

[ETMuz 3]

24 minutes ago, Fabulin said:

I am not sure if I understand "parallel tritones" correctly. Does it mean that for example the first violins play the (two octaves up) artificial harmonics, sounding close to their highest register (E7), while the second violins play the harmonics a tritone lower, doubling the melody with a G#6-...A#6-G#6-G6-A#6-G#6-F#6 sequence?

I could be wrong but what I understood what he meant by parallel is that the first Tri-tone comes in at 3:07 with the notes Eb and A - then moves up at 3:11 to Ab and D, then moves up a whole step to Bb and E then back down a whole step. Then down a half step then back up a half step. Keeping the distance with those two notes a tri-tone away.

 

that may not be what he meant but that’s the way I took it.

[Falstaft 2,132]

1 hour ago, Fabulin said:

I am not sure if I understand "parallel tritones" correctly. Does it mean that for example the first violins play the (two octaves up) artificial harmonics, sounding close to their highest register (E7), while the second violins play the harmonics a tritone lower, doubling the melody with a G#6-...A#6-G#6-G6-A#6-G#6-F#6 sequence?

 

Yep!

 

So, it's more like

 

Top:      A6       D7       E7    D7   C#7  E7   D7    C7

Below:  D#6    G#6     A#6  G#6  G6  A#6 G#6   F#6