Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 Discuss! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gurkensalat 336 Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 No, because he did not score movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 24, 2020 Author Share Posted November 24, 2020 Heck, he didn't even play the guitar! bollemanneke 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bespin 8,480 Posted November 24, 2020 Share Posted November 24, 2020 Which Bach? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 24, 2020 Author Share Posted November 24, 2020 PDQ Bach. Gurkensalat 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Yes. He took all the boring stuff before him and perfected it, made it sound interesting. The difference is Bach to me just sounds 'Baroque,' while Williams had a lot of diverse influences like The Planets, Hanson's 2nd, jazz music. Bach's influences nobody cares about. Ricard 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabulin 3,510 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 16 minutes ago, Oomoog the Ecstatic said: Yes. He took all the boring stuff before him and perfected it, made it sound interesting. The difference is Bach to me just sounds 'Baroque', while Williams had a lot of diverse influences like The Planets, Hanson's 2nd, jazz music. Bach's influences nobody cares about. This is the little joke of history, isn't it? 90% of influences in the music of great composers are ignored because they come from lesser works, even if the moments in those lesser works were effective as well. What helps to conceal these long and diverse stylistic roots is quite paradoxically that the composers were scared of trying to improve on the really famous works. Meanwhile Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Wagner, Tchaikovsky, Shostakovich, or Williams - were quite Luke Skywalker about it. Oomoog the Ecstatic 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 I always called what they do 'music appreciation' at the very core of its meaning. I've noticed a lot of indie composers go the same route, composing in the style of--the big difference between them and avant-garde composers is their overendulgence in the sentiment of classics. I have a hard time imagining someone more in love with Beethoven for instance the structure and breakdown is exactly the same as his 3rd: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bayesian 1,359 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Wet blanket chiming in! I don’t really get the appeal of these types of questions, which are excessively moot. If they try hard enough, people are going to find ways to argue every step on the gradient between 100% yes and 100% no. Which is another way of me saying, why bother with this exercise? Maybe it’d help to give some parameters. Was Bach the JW of his time based on personality? Productivity? How much money he made? How lauded he was while alive? How many things he wrote? Technical competency? Give us a boundary! Thor 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 It's obvious how the beginning of the Brahms starts as if struggling to give his original voice some merit, but within minutes Beethoven takes completely over. Haha. Some sort of musical necessity or 'appreciation.' It's an instinct that seems to take over moments in Williams' scores as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 When I really think of that concept of greatest 'music appreciation', Uematsu comes to mind the very utmost. But Williams is there too in emotional expression: I had said once I think film score composers are closer in mannerism to Romantic composers, ie. emotions, where as I think Uematsu is closer to Classical composers, ie. perfect simplicity. Tchaikovsky, Williams, Brahms, and Dvorak are also sometimes in the second category however. It depends on how simple yet effective the music is, the latter category of composers feel just more thematic and natural to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce marshall 1,315 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 4 hours ago, Oomoog the Ecstatic said: The difference is Bach to me just sounds 'Baroque,' Nope. His cantatas have a very ' romantic' sensibility. His organ works range from spiritual to virtuosic improvisation. His preludes have memorable melodies. Only his strict fugues can be labeled unmistakably " baroque". Incredible variety in his work. There is Bach and all the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Nah. Not 'Romantic,' nor necessarily superior. Just a brilliant and enlightened composer of Baroque music. Perhaps the only real one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 Then you need to listen to more baroque composers. Score 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 That's something a Baroque composer would say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 No, it's something someone who's not only heard of Bach would say. Score 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce marshall 1,315 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 The classical period is the onebi can't stand. I don't like a single composer from that era . And Beethoven doesn't count ; he's more Romantic than classical. Bayesian 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 1 minute ago, bruce marshall said: The classical period is the onebi can't stand. I don't like a single composer from that era . And Beethoven doesn't count ; he's more Romantic than classical. They don't like you either. bruce marshall 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce marshall 1,315 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Bunch of bewigged poofters! 😝 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 8 hours ago, Bayesian said: Which is another way of me saying, why bother with this exercise? Spot on! This thread is merely a parody of another thread, and is not meant to make much sense at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Score 770 Posted November 25, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted November 25, 2020 Well, instead of comparing Williams to Bach, I would compare him to Tchaikovsky. However, Tchaikovsky : Brahms = Williams : Morricone and therefore, Tchaikovsky = Williams x Brahms / Morricone . So, we cannot really say that Tchaikovsky was the John Williams of his time. I would rather say, Tchaikovsky was the John Williams times Brahms divided by Morricone, of his time. I hope this makes sense. The Illustrious Jerry, Bayesian, Holko and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 That's deep, man! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Score 770 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 I know, it was a pleasure to share with you this major breakthrough in musicology! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 Please, tell us more! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Biodome 714 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 2 hours ago, Score said: Tchaikovsky = Williams x Brahms / Morricone . So, we cannot really say that Tchaikovsky was the John Williams of his time. I would rather say, Tchaikovsky was the John Williams times Brahms divided by Morricone, of his time. I hope this makes sense. Note that this is only true for Morricone, where {Morricone∈ℝ∣Morricone≠0} Holko and Score 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Score 770 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 56 minutes ago, Biodome said: Note that this is only true for Morricone, where {Morricone∈ℝ∣Morricone≠0} Not exactly; it is enough to assume that Morricone is not zero (but this is obviously true!), but he does need to be real (he can be complex - and indeed, some of his music is really complex). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 I was about to write that, but you beat me to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Holko 9,499 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 12 minutes ago, Score said: he can be complex - and indeed, some of his music is really complex So is he or his music partly imaginary? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 Only the music he's currently writing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marian Schedenig 8,173 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Morricone's works certainly are uncountable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jurassic Shark 12,030 Posted November 25, 2020 Author Share Posted November 25, 2020 At least the number is finite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 It's exponential. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TSMefford 1,509 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 No. Bach was the John Williams of his time. Jurassic Shark 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
publicist 4,643 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Bill Ross has spoken. TSMefford 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oomoog the Ecstatic 314 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 3 hours ago, TSMefford said: No. Bach was the John Williams of his time. W. F. Bach was John Williams the guitarist of his time. I'd agree with this. TSMefford 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce marshall 1,315 Posted November 25, 2020 Share Posted November 25, 2020 Barbara Bach is the Leya Sedoux of our time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now