PDA

View Full Version : Is Movie Music Becoming the "New Classical"?



resolve
14th August 09, 12:51 PM
By classical I mean music that defines our society and progress in our time while following exceptional compositional standards; not necessarily adhering to the tenets of classical music composition. It's more environmental than direct I would have to say.


Filmmaking has become the premiere artform of humanity if by nothing else than saturation. What I find absolutely fascinating is the artform of the soundtrack of a movie itself.

I haven't even seen this movie yet this song is powerfully haunting it actively engages my mind and emotions at once:

szz0TouzhLA

It is often said that music alone can make or break a movie.

How can it be that this particular style of cinematic music can reach in and touch on an emotional level that alot of other genres cannot? And in almost near everyone that hears it... it moves them.

More beautiful soundtrack goodness:

vHAvjaHtlMA

cWnmCu3U09w
Funny that this was composed in the 19th century tho it's well known as a movie piece :P

-bzWSJG93P8

9iteRKvRKFA

BWAhVbayGv4
(interesting sidenote: the guy who was torn in half... was a movie portrayal of my Dad's friend irl. He watched him die)

-xah54i2u7c

Xyo9xrd03jA

2eouUdcgXBE

zoJoFMdSDuI
Indie producer who makes environment soundscapes

And who can forget this beautiful piece of tragedy?

e2Ma4BvMUwU


POST YOUR OWN!

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
14th August 09, 01:37 PM
No, dude, that's retarded.

resolve
14th August 09, 02:23 PM
Hurr hurr.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
14th August 09, 02:32 PM
Classical music was cutting edge and composed for the sake of the art.
This shit is derivative and composed so more people will buy movie tickets.

DerAuslander108
14th August 09, 02:37 PM
There is some verity to what he says. The motion picture soundtrack has become a very focal piece of orchestral composition.

Cullion
14th August 09, 03:31 PM
I usually find 'orchestral' motion picture soundtracks to be less accomplished and complex variations on real classical pieces.

I like the original Star Wars trilogy soundtrack simply for the nostalgia it evokes for the awesome of watching the movies first time as a kid, but musically most of the key thematic parts are just slightly schmaltzy simplifications of Holst's planet suite.

resolve
14th August 09, 04:03 PM
Aside from the 2001 Space Odyssey (obviously) and the Last Samurai, which to its credit invluded alot of fun little asian tidbits all over the pieces I linked... I'm not recognizing much of anything classical in those pieces I presented for you guys to listen to.

Care to share some of what you are mentioning Cullion?

Cullion
14th August 09, 04:26 PM
Sure, here's the music for an Imperial Star Destroyer appearing:-

Tn_95hdy6Nw

And here's 'Mars, bringer of War' from Holst's Planet suite.

L0bcRCCg01I

Now, obviously they're different pieces of music, but I can hear a lot of the themes from the second piece played in a much more simplistic, faster and more strident way in Vader's intro music. The first is just like a brutal simplification of the second piece to me, with whole layers of meaning chopped out.

The atmospheric pseudo-mystical music when Yoda does something profound (especially when he's dying) is like a massively simplified version of the final third section of 'Saturn, Bringer of Old Age' from the same suite.

resolve
14th August 09, 04:40 PM
Very cool. I'd be interested in listening to more comparison things like that! I really see what you are saying here.

I think the main difference is it trying to appeal to raw emotion more. Classical music, to me, seems more like an intellectual engagement where you can appreciate every single little note and warble and instrument choice.

When I hear modern orchestral pieces I almost hear something more playful and emotionally more raw than a strict classical composition (although baroque period does have some serious intense emotional pieces as well but the shift from classical to baroque is something entirely different and I'm not very well educated on it). Also with the advent of digital synthesizers it is possible to warp notes and frequencies like never before so that we can play with it even more. Although, the actual playing itself has been done over and over throughout time.

Cullion
14th August 09, 04:56 PM
Ok, well, here's the other comparison I mentioned.

The music playing in the background of Yoda's death scene:-

vtoxqV9qIng

And this is Saturn, Bringer of Old Age:-

ESARBMvPJ4M

To my mind, the two 'classical' pieces are also appealing to emotion. I'm not a musician, so I really don't take in every note and technical frill in the way that a musician would.

What I'm hearing in Holst's Mars are fuller, more complex layers of emotional evocations about war. It has sections that gradually build up and engage you in the idea of war as an exciting and glorious thing before the horns start blaring and it tries to frighten you. Vader's theme just shoots straight to that bit in a fast, strident, less musically complex way.

It's like comparing a good cut of steak that's been overcooked a bit on the barbecue and smothered in awesome home made hot chili sauce, with something a world famous chef just prepared for you with a sauce that took a couple of hours to make with a finely honed balance of lots of ingredients picked fresh that day, following principles that have been carefully refined for centuries in the kitchens of Europe's royal palaces.

The classical versions are addressing the emotions too, but they're addressing a broader range of emotions in a finely-blended way to tell a story, and taking time to make their point.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
14th August 09, 05:16 PM
What really eats me about your stupid theory:


By classical I mean music that defines our society and progress in our time while following exceptional compositional standards

Defines our society? You're going to have to do more than post movie soundtracks to convince me about this one.

Dark Helmet
14th August 09, 06:19 PM
How could you bring up all of those soundtracks but not post any of Ennio Morricone?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2s0-wbXC3pQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV3pzlp-Mv4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L2eQcHkSCg&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xxjp9l1ZEoY

WarPhalange
14th August 09, 08:46 PM
One hundred years from now, nobody will give a shit about 99% of movie sound tracks. Only ones like the Star Wars sound track will be known by *some*, and that's only because they like the movie and not the music by itself. Nobody will give a shit about any of these composers, not even John Williams.

But you know what WILL be remembered for the rest of forever?

MEKDF_WbMlg&feature=related

That's right, shitty 8-bit boops and bops will go down in history as something that defined our culture while all those ZOMG [email protected]!!!!1 movie sound tracks are forgotten as soon as the movie is over. Now, just like with Star Wars, this will be the game making the music immortal, but the point is that 8-bits > orchestra in this case, which means that orchestrated movie sound tracks obviously aren't as important to our society and culture.

Artful Dentures
14th August 09, 09:35 PM
Classical music was cutting edge and composed for the sake of the art.
This shit is derivative and composed so more people will buy movie tickets.


You're such a little pretensious turd

Classical music was composed and performed for people to listen to, people who paid to listen to it.

Classical music has always been a form of entertainment, and there's no difference from a composer writing a piece for an Opera or ballet or for any type of performance than a composer writing a piece of music for a movie.

Also all music is derivative it why we do more than bang rocks.

The best orchestrated pieces are being done for film score.

Why

Because A - Da money

B - creativity is a function of limitations and Real artists finding their way around limitations

Some pretentius prick creating a "sound scape" composed of atonal clicks and beeps is not an artistic genius but a boring delusional hack.

A composer who does something powerful and unique under the limitations of having a specific purpose for a film score is far more creative

Also to the OP

Search function noob

http://www.sociocide.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1298044#post1298044

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 12:04 AM
When I said "for the sake of the art" I meant that the greats generally composed towards their artistic vision first and if people enjoyed it they just did. I doubt Beethoven ever wrote an inspired lick only to scratch it out because he didn't think the public would like it, which is the sort of bullshit compromise you have to make when you compose for a movie score.


A composer who does something powerful and unique under the limitations of having a specific purpose for a film score is far more creative

That's silly. What if I made a song entirely with a thumb piano and said it was high art because I was working under the limitation of only using a thumb piano? It would still be a shitty song. It doesn't become noble when you change "thumb piano" to "the whims of the director and producers".


Also all music is derivative it why we do more than bang rocks.

Don't be a fucking smartass.

Cullion
15th August 09, 04:57 AM
Classical music was composed and performed for people to listen to, people who paid to listen to it.

I agree.



Classical music has always been a form of entertainment, and there's no difference from a composer writing a piece for an Opera or ballet or for any type of performance than a composer writing a piece of music for a movie.

I would disagree here. Firstly, a piece of music composed for film often has a simpler task to achieve. Looking back at the 'Imperial March' vs 'Mars, Bringer of War' example, I think a big part of the difference isn't because John Williams isn't musically skilled, it's because his job was to write a piece of music that he knew would only be played in brief segments that had to do one job. That job was to tell the audience 'be scared of the person or spaceship which appears when this music plays', and he did it well.

Holst writing Mars was writing something that would play without interruption for minutes and minutes, with no visual story telling aids accompanying it, so he just used minutes and minutes of music to tell a more complex story about the emotional nature of war as he saw it.

So, I think the 'classical' piece was more sophisticated, but not because of a kind of elitism so much as a recognition that the two pieces have a different job to do. One is a brief accompaniment to a complete piece of visual art, the other has more time to fill and is self-contained.



The best orchestrated pieces are being done for film score.

Why

Because A - Da money

I don't agree here. Da money brings deadlines with it, and this can fuck with the process. Some of the best software is written for free by people looking for status amongst their peers, I think it is often the same with art.



B - creativity is a function of limitations and Real artists finding their way around limitations

Some pretentius prick creating a "sound scape" composed of atonal clicks and beeps is not an artistic genius but a boring delusional hack.

I agree on these points, but I don't think true classics (oh, please don't ask me to define this!) fail on these points.



A composer who does something powerful and unique under the limitations of having a specific purpose for a film score is far more creative

I hope I've gone some way to showing that we're really talking about pieces of music with different jobs to do.

Cullion
15th August 09, 04:59 AM
One hundred years from now, nobody will give a shit about 99% of movie sound tracks. Only ones like the Star Wars sound track will be known by *some*, and that's only because they like the movie and not the music by itself.

I think one of the few objective tests of whether something is a classic is longevity, and with the art of cinema it's too early to tell, at least relative to what we're calling 'classical music'. I believe that there will be some films and books from the 20th century that get remembered as classics, but it's only my subjective opinion what those will be (I think the original Star Wars trilogy and the Lord of the Rings books will both qualify, but only time will tell).

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 11:11 AM
When I said "for the sake of the art" I meant that the greats generally composed towards their artistic vision first and if people enjoyed it they just did. I doubt Beethoven ever wrote an inspired lick only to scratch it out because he didn't think the public would like it, which is the sort of bullshit compromise you have to make when you compose for a movie score.


Beethoven, Mozart, Bach and so on and so forth we're often commissioned.

Also their genius resided in the fact that what they did resonated and appealed to the public. Which is why we still listen to them.

Writing a movie score is no more anit-creative than anything else.

The real geniuses like Bsil Poldarius and Arran Copeland and Ennio Morricone wrote for a specific purpose and found ways to be unique, popular and creative.

Limitations force you to be MORE creative.




That's silly. What if I made a song entirely with a thumb piano and said it was high art because I was working under the limitation of only using a thumb piano? It would still be a shitty song. It doesn't become noble when you change "thumb piano" to "the whims of the director and producers".

Technical limitations of an instrument is not what I am talking about and you know that.

Also Mozart wrote a piece composed using childrens toy intrsuments for the magic flute, a piece he was comissioned to.





Don't be a fucking smartass.

I am not being a smart ass all music is built on what goes before, weather something is derivative or not has nothing to do with the "whims of directors." and more to do with the composers talentS

ee my upcoming answer to Cullion


True creative talent is finding ways through limitations, writing for a specific purpose and dealing with "directors" are limitations that the geniuses we love over come.

Writing them off pecause it's done for popular culture is just silly elitism

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 11:20 AM
I agree.



I would disagree here. Firstly, a piece of music composed for film often has a simpler task to achieve. Looking back at the 'Imperial March' vs 'Mars, Bringer of War' example, I think a big part of the difference isn't because John Williams isn't musically skilled, it's because his job was to write a piece of music that he knew would only be played in brief segments that had to do one job. That job was to tell the audience 'be scared of the person or spaceship which appears when this music plays', and he did it well.



The fact that movie compositions get choped up and segmented for the editing of the movie doesn't reflect on their technical powers or complexity.

As somone who as a kid owned the star wars recored, the whole thing plays like a symphony




Holst writing Mars was writing something that would play without interruption for minutes and minutes, with no visual story telling aids accompanying it, so he just used minutes and minutes of music to tell a more complex story about the emotional nature of war as he saw it.

So, I think the 'classical' piece was more sophisticated, but not because of a kind of elitism so much as a recognition that the two pieces have a different job to do. One is a brief accompaniment to a complete piece of visual art, the other has more time to fill and is self-contained.



It's funny that you bring up Holst - and the Planets Suite as it's one of the most influential pieces of music on modern cinema composition. If Holst was born today thats where he would be working and composing for.

As far as music being used for a job use of the Blue Danube in 2001 or Carmina Barina in Excalibur don't make the pieces of music any less brilliant.

So yes it's true movie music serves a purpose but the real great stuff exists on its own as well.

I would gladly pay money to go to a concert to Listen to All of Basil Poleduris workd, or Ennio Morricone or John Barry.

Because it's great music regardless of why it was commisioned.

I don't agree here. Da money brings deadlines with it, and this can fuck with the process. Some of the best software is written for free by people looking for status amongst their peers, I think it is often the same with art.

Cullion
15th August 09, 12:17 PM
The fact that movie compositions get choped up and segmented for the editing of the movie doesn't reflect on their technical powers or complexity.

I think we sort of agree on everything else, but here's where I differ: It's not that the music was changed by the editing, it's that the music was written in the knowledge it would play as an accompaniment in short segments. There Imperial March is musically simpler than Holst's Mars for this reason, not because John Williams is inherently less skilled.

The Blue Danube and the Carmina Burana of course weren't written for films.

The other movie composers you mention ?

Yeah, they're good, but they're just not tasked with the same job.

EuropIan
15th August 09, 02:14 PM
9E-yYkVQmg8

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 03:02 PM
I think we sort of agree on everything else, but here's where I differ: It's not that the music was changed by the editing, it's that the music was written in the knowledge it would play as an accompaniment in short segments. There Imperial March is musically simpler than Holst's Mars for this reason, not because John Williams is inherently less skilled.

The Blue Danube and the Carmina Burana of course weren't written for films.

The other movie composers you mention ?

Yeah, they're good, but they're just not tasked with the same job.


I just think that the quality of composition is irrelevant to the job it was tasked for.

While it would be harder and more work to write theres nothing to say a 2 hour symphony is going to be better quality than a 2 minute jingle for bleach.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 03:08 PM
Beethoven, Mozart, Bach and so on and so forth we're often commissioned.

That's not similar at all, because the only limitations when you're working on a commission are what kind of music the client wants. You're not hemmed in by the brevity or content of a particular scene because when you're composing a symphony or opera you're the one who makes those decisions.


Also their genius resided in the fact that what they did resonated and appealed to the public. Which is why we still listen to them.

No, we don't particularly give a fuck about what the public thought when we pick works of art to canonize.


Limitations force you to be MORE creative.

Why? That's a stupid little anecdote you're holding over from elementary school, the best music is always going to be written when the artist has unlimited control over his work.


True creative talent is finding ways through limitations, writing for a specific purpose and dealing with "directors" are limitations that the geniuses we love over come.

So advertising is the zenith of the arts?


Writing them off pecause it's done for popular culture is just silly elitism

I never necessarily said the music was bad, actually, and that wasn't the reason I said they were inferior to classical music.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 03:11 PM
I am not being a smart ass all music is built on what goes before

I'm putting this by itself because I want you to pay special attention to it. It is retarded. Being influenced by other musicians has nothing to do with writing derivative crap.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 03:12 PM
While it would be harder and more work to write theres nothing to say a 2 hour symphony is going to be better quality than a 2 minute jingle for bleach.

Only in the sense that they both have infinite potential to suck. Two minutes is not enough time for a well developed piece.

EuropIan
15th August 09, 03:13 PM
Why? That's a stupid little anecdote you're holding over from elementary school, the best music is always going to be written when the artist has unlimited control over his work.

This doesn't automatically imply that "THE BEST SONG EV4R ZOMG!" has to be two hours long.

It just means the artist did what they wanted to because it sounded right, and that could very well be long.

But I think Goju was espousing the virtue of self-control in arts.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 03:19 PM
"Limitations force you to be more creative" doesn't even suggest that.

EuropIan
15th August 09, 03:43 PM
It can be a nice exercise in creativity.. However natural limitations (ie. this one string guitar is all I have) usually produces better results

saying it's the "end all be all" is blatantly false.

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 03:47 PM
That's not similar at all, because the only limitations when you're working on a commission are what kind of music the client wants. You're not hemmed in by the brevity or content of a particular scene because when you're composing a symphony or opera you're the one who makes those decisions.


Gaaaah Go take a music history class you have no clue what so ever what you're talking about.




No, we don't particularly give a fuck about what the public thought when we pick works of art to canonize.



We? Who is we? If people don't listen to music it does. Either it's good or not/ We don't chose shit.

You're nto a precious snow flake. Public opinion and public like of something is the ONLY thing that stands the test of time.




Why? That's a stupid little anecdote you're holding over from elementary school, the best music is always going to be written when the artist has unlimited control over his work.


Again go fucking take a music history class. Creativity is related to limitations.

Music comes with it's own limitations sometimes the composer sets his own limitations to challenge himself.

Read up on Ravel and why he wrote Bolero




So advertising is the zenith of the arts?


Don't be obtuse. You're smarter than that



I never necessarily said the music was bad, actually, and that wasn't the reason I said they were inferior to classical music.

No you used a completely irrelvant measuring stick to try and decide something.

True genius overcomes obstacles. Saying that becasue they had to listen to someone elses opinion or had to accomplish a specific purpose made them inferior is just elitism and silly.

Music is awesome because quality ALWAYS rises, people will delude themself a long time with other art forms but music either works and remains in the public consciousness or it fades away and is never performed again.



Only in the sense that they both have infinite potential to suck. Two minutes is not enough time for a well developed piece.

Well I guess you know better than Bach

Most people consider this a classic

KjMHPAIuZIU

Yes Bach's Minute in G minor was part of larger piece but it works on it's own just at 2 minutes as a fully developed piece

And if he was alive today and worte this for comercial selling toilet paper it would still be brilliant, even if some art director was looking over his shoulder telling him he wanted people to visualize cottony softness on their ass.

Cullion
15th August 09, 04:34 PM
I just think that the quality of composition is irrelevant to the job it was tasked for.

While it would be harder and more work to write theres nothing to say a 2 hour symphony is going to be better quality than a 2 minute jingle for bleach.

No that's true, but if you took the same guy and got him to write the 2 minute jingle, he's not going to be able to develop things in the same depth employing the same range of techniques as if you gave him 2 hours.

Now, he may be better at the 2 minute stuff than the 2 hours with a full Orchestra I grant you.

I think the difference I'm trying to explain is that we're essentially comparing different artforms. It's like comparing a the words of a novel to the dialogue in a graphic novel.
One may evince more skill than the other. The captions for 'Arkham Asylum' are a higher form of art than most of the prose in paperback novels you pick up in airports, but the Novel is the arena where pure prose wordplay can be most fully developed and experimented with. The comic book is a different artform and the prose in it is part of a whole, an accompaniment.

That's the difference between Holst's Mars and the Imperial March. One is self-contained music with much more room for Holst to play with, the other is the a brief accompaniment used to introduce characters on a screen. That's not the same as calling John Williams a tard, or people who like the Star Wars theme musical knuckle draggers, any more than recognising there's a difference between writing the dialogue for a comic book and writing a novel.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 04:44 PM
Gaaaah Go take a music history class you have no clue what so ever what you're talking about.

Oh that's fucking cute, suck my dick.



True genius overcomes obstacles. Saying that becasue they had to listen to someone elses opinion or had to accomplish a specific purpose made them inferior is just elitism and silly.

I didn't say that, I said that music for movies suffers because you're given a scene that was created without your input and told to write something to match it, and oh p.s. you have thirty seconds to do it with. I never said that the music will be bad but it's not going to be to the caliber of music written for music's sake and that's what this thread is about.


Music is awesome because quality ALWAYS rises, people will delude themself a long time with other art forms but music either works and remains in the public consciousness or it fades away and is never performed again.

The public didn't give a shit about Robert Johnson until thirty years after he died.


Well I guess you know better than Bach

[...] part of larger piece

Was that a joke?


And if he was alive today and worte this for comercial selling toilet paper it would still be brilliant, even if some art director was looking over his shoulder telling him he wanted people to visualize cottony softness on their ass.

But then he wouldn't have wrote that song, and why do you assume he would have written for commercials anyway? Did Monk or Mingus ever write commercial jingles? They had better shit to do.

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 04:46 PM
No that's true, but if you took the same guy and got him to write the 2 minute jingle, he's not going to be able to develop things in the same depth employing the same range of techniques as if you gave him 2 hours.

Now, he may be better at the 2 minute stuff than the 2 hours with a full Orchestra I grant you.

I think the difference I'm trying to explain is that we're essentially comparing different artforms. It's like comparing a the words of a novel to the dialogue in a graphic novel.
One may evince more skill than the other. The captions for 'Arkham Asylum' are a higher form of art than most of the prose in paperback novels you pick up in airports, but the Novel is the arena where pure prose wordplay can be most fully developed and experimented with. The comic book is a different artform and the prose in it is part of a whole, an accompaniment.

That's the difference between Holst's Mars and the Imperial March. One is self-contained music with much more room for Holst to play with, the other is the a brief accompaniment used to introduce characters on a screen. That's not the same as calling John Williams a tard, or people who like the Star Wars theme musical knuckle draggers, any more than recognising there's a difference between writing the dialogue for a comic book and writing a novel.

Yes there's a difference, but your anlogy falls short somewhat.

I understand what you mean but the prose in a graphic novel can't stand up on their own.

Where as you can have a 2 hour concert featuring Howard Shors Lord of the ring soundtrack music or John Willams, Or Bsil Poledurius, Or John Barry or Ennio Morricone.

You don't need the movies to play with them to enjoy, understand or appreciate the music.


Just because Poledurious has Milus Forman tell him what he's looking for in a movie that features a half naked Arnold Shwartzenager and needs a certain type of music doesn't make the music dependant on oiled up Shwartzenager.

Where as the art work and prose of the Watchman can't really exist with out each other.

Incedentally Poledurius had huge artistic freedom on Conan, wrote it before filming.

I always felt the mive was made to accompany the music.

The best ground breaking most experimental orchestrated music is happening in the film business now.

Cullion
15th August 09, 04:57 PM
On that point we part company. If I listen to the Star Wars soundtrack, it brings back happy nostalgia for the films, but if I compare them, as standalone pieces of music, against things like Holst's planets, then the sophistication of Holst is just in a different league. The Star Wars theme is left sounding crude and bombastic.

This is subjective opinion though. It's not like we can prove our points here.

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 05:31 PM
Oh that's fucking cute, suck my dick.



I am not being cute I started to write about artists being commissioned, working for patrons from Moxart, to Michelangelo to Frank Loyd Wright but I figured why bother you should go pay for a proper education.

You're factualy wrong about a lot of stuff.



I didn't say that, I said that music for movies suffers because you're given a scene that was created without your input and told to write something to match it, and oh p.s. you have thirty seconds to do it with. I never said that the music will be bad but it's not going to be to the caliber of music written for music's sake and that's what this thread is about.


So when a compser works with an author on a libereto for an opera it's going to suck because the compose had no say in Libreto?

Ennio Morricone doesn't need to have input into the filiming of The Mission to write an amazing piece for it.

It's like saying that since Michelangelo didn't write the bible or build the chapel his work on the sistine chapel was somewaht less?

Come on! Give me a break.

Also you don't know anything about the actualy techniques of film composition.

While a certain section might be used in a 30 second piece that doesn't mean it was written or composed as a longer piece.




The public didn't give a shit about Robert Johnson until thirty years after he died.


Apparently the public who bought his first records did. Apparently the public who heard him play did. apparently the people who recorded him did.

If they didn't you would have never "discovered him" yourself





But then he wouldn't have wrote that song, and why do you assume he would have written for commercials anyway? Did Monk or Mingus ever write commercial jingles? They had better shit to do.

How do you know he wouldn't have wrote The minuete in G for toilet paper?

You're falling into the pretentious void of the mediocre who laughs and scoffs at people who get paid to do stuff and act as if the reason no one likes, listens to or has any interrest in what they do is because you're a mis understood genius.

The reason most of the best orchestrated music is being compsed for fim scors is because the best composers are approached to work on it.

Not every muscian has to prove themself with commercial success, but commercial success doesn't take away from a musicians ability either.

Liek I said earlier you're not a precious snow flake

DAYoung
15th August 09, 05:40 PM
Great thread.

I'm with MJS and Cullion on this.

With one exception: Cullion, with sufficient knowledge of music and the language of musical aesthetics, we probably could make reasonable and compelling arguments about the superior properties of classical music.

We wouldn't necessarily persuade, but this would be because people are difficult to persuade, not because the matter-at-hand isn't amenable to reasonable debate about identifiable, external qualities.

Put simply: music has qualities, and we can talk about them, and what they offer the intellect, emotion and perception.

Cullion
15th August 09, 05:54 PM
I think maybe armed with that education I could make compelling arguments about the classical music being more sophisticated, but 'superior' is all in the listener's ear.

Somebody might just not like sophisticated music <shrugs>.

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 05:59 PM
Even Sophisticated is a relative Term

Phillip Glass is considered sophisticated and he has scored movies.

There's nothing intrinsic about film composition to make it any less (or more) than composition for other purposes.

DAYoung
15th August 09, 06:00 PM
I think maybe armed with that education I could make compelling arguments about the classical music being more sophisticated, but 'superior' is all in the listener's ear.

Somebody might just not like sophisticated music <shrugs>.

I agree with the gist of this.

But let me put it this way: we call something 'art' because it affords something other things don't. To my mind, art offers experiences that craft (for example) doesn't.

And the better the art, the more rich, nuanced or lucid the experience - its qualities offer more to the imagination.

So, it's not morally superior, or absolutely superior - it's superior, as art.

DAYoung
15th August 09, 06:06 PM
Even Sophisticated is a relative Term

Phillip Glass is considered sophisticated and he has scored movies.

There's nothing intrinsic about film composition to make it any less (or more) than composition for other purposes.

I agree with this. There's nothing intrinsic to it. But often it's the case.

WarPhalange
15th August 09, 06:18 PM
Who gets to define what is "superior"?

DAYoung
15th August 09, 06:20 PM
Everyone, on a case by case basis.

Cullion
15th August 09, 06:22 PM
Who gets to define what is "superior"?

Damon's just being nice to you. The real answer is that it's an intellectual elite which you aren't a member of yet.

DAYoung
15th August 09, 06:24 PM
Damon's just being nice to you. The real answer is that it's an intellectual elite which you aren't a member of yet.

I'm not sure it's an intellectual elite.

But you might be right.

Either way, they're not letting Loops in.

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
15th August 09, 06:34 PM
So when a compser works with an author on a libereto for an opera it's going to suck because the compose had no say in Libreto?

That's completely different. We're talking about a medium where the music is just as or more important than what is on stage, not where the music exists to introduce a character or let the audience know that this is a sad scene. Movies don't usually play out like operas, though they certain can and have.


Ennio Morricone doesn't need to have input into the filiming of The Mission to write an amazing piece for it.

It's like saying that since Michelangelo didn't write the bible or build the chapel his work on the sistine chapel was somewaht less?

Your first example sucks because I never said that music for movies was bad, just that it's inferior to what can be done with music written for itself.
Your second example just sucks.


Apparently the public who bought his first records did. Apparently the public who heard him play did. apparently the people who recorded him did.

If they didn't you would have never "discovered him" yourself

The public weren't buying his records, that was my point. He had a handful of recording dates then promptly disappeared into the performance circuit. He didn't become a classic blues musicians until well after he died so obviously it's not important what people of his time thought about his work when we consider canonizing it among blues classics.


You're falling into the pretentious void of the mediocre who laughs and scoffs at people who get paid to do stuff and act as if the reason no one likes, listens to or has any interrest in what they do is because you're a mis understood genius.

The reason most of the best orchestrated music is being compsed for fim scors is because the best composers are approached to work on it.

Not every muscian has to prove themself with commercial success, but commercial success doesn't take away from a musicians ability either.

Liek I said earlier you're not a precious snow flake

I never said any of this. Cut this shit out dude, it's really immature.

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 06:50 PM
Robert Johnson and even Monk shouldn't be discussed because both of them had to deal with being Black musicians in sgragated America at different times and that had an effect on their popularity.

Although with Monk a devoted family man who was often broke, I doubt if offered he would have turned down commercial work.



That's completely different. We're talking about a medium where the music is just as or more important than what is on stage, not where the music exists to introduce a character or let the audience know that this is a sad scene. Movies don't usually play out like operas, though they certain can and have.


Music on Movies is hardly "just to introduce a character" it sets tone atmospher and tell a story.

Like music in an opera, ballet or symphony.

It justa s important as dialogue

nothing you say stands up to it own example

I.E. Sergei Prokofiev for the Ballet version of Romeo and julliet is brilliant orchestraetd music, composed for a story Prokofiev didn't write, serving the needs of the dancers.

Use to tell a story, introduce characters, set atmosphere.

There's no significant difference between this and film composition.

Yes the dance with out music would look silly.

A movie with out music would also look silly.

There's a reason silent films were accompanied by a written score played on piano.

Cullion
15th August 09, 07:02 PM
Joe, are you a muscian who works on movies, TV and/or commercials ?

Artful Dentures
15th August 09, 07:34 PM
Joe, are you a muscian who works on movies, TV and/or commercials ?

I am an amateur musicians (in fact I am going out to jam) and I used to work in Film and television and knew a few musicians who worked there.

Also I love movie soundtracks

My you tube play list is full of them

And Holst too

If I could quit what I do for a living and do movie soundtracks I would be happier than a pig in shit.

DAYoung
15th August 09, 10:38 PM
Some of my favourite soundtracks:

- Mishima (1985) (by Phillip Glass)

- The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) (by Peter Gabriel)

- Star Trek (2009) (by Michael Giacchino)

EuropIan
15th August 09, 10:45 PM
Joe, are you a muscian who works on movies, TV and/or commercials ?
One of my friends is, he does jingles. But he wants to do movies.

Anyways, he works to order and have to meet with execs who know jack shit.

So he just preempts the discussion and does it "like that one movie".

P.s. he hates music.

resolve
17th August 09, 10:22 AM
Great thread.

I always get +rep for posting something hilariously stupid and never for starting great conversations :-/ lol.

Ajamil
19th August 09, 10:05 AM
The best ground breaking most experimental orchestrated music is happening in the film business now.
Isn't this the fault of the majority of people going to see movies rather than going to hear an orchestra?

Other thread reminded me: what of orchestral composition in games these days?

Artful Dentures
19th August 09, 11:23 AM
Isn't this the fault of the majority of people going to see movies rather than going to hear an orchestra?

Other thread reminded me: what of orchestral composition in games these days?

Sure but thats not the point'

MEGA JESUS-SAMA
19th August 09, 02:54 PM
Robert Johnson and even Monk shouldn't be discussed because both of them had to deal with being Black musicians in sgragated America at different times and that had an effect on their popularity.

That's a gay little cop out and you know it.


Music on Movies is hardly "just to introduce a character" it sets tone atmospher and tell a story. blah blah blah

That wasn't the point! The point is that movie music is usually a weaker imitation of classical at best.

Artful Dentures
19th August 09, 08:04 PM
That's a gay little cop out and you know it.

It's not a gay cop out and you know it.


Especially with Robert Johnson playing blues in the US in 30's

You can't just pretend that Racism from that era had nothing to do with his popularity and the availability of his music then.

Nor can you just ignore the counter culture folk singing culture of the 60's 30 years later for his rise in popularity.

It doesn't exist in a vacum

Anyways Lead Belly was much better




That wasn't the point! The point is that movie music is usually a weaker imitation of classical at best.

Sorry but you said



That's completely different. We're talking about a medium where the music is just as or more important than what is on stage, not where the music exists to introduce a character or let the audience know that this is a sad scene. Movies don't usually play out like operas, though they certain can and have.



So that is as your point. That it is weaker because it's used for specific story telling purposes

As I pointed out how the music is used makes no difference to it's quality.

And with my Prokofiev example there are PLENTY of classical examples where the same measuring stick can be applied.

And you can't pick and choose to applaud one and downplay the other when it's exactly the same.

Arguments don't work that way.

Saying that orchestrated music for movies is weaker because it serves a narrative purpose is ridiculous. Composers of pure orchestral music often choose their own narrative themes to compose around.

And let me preempt your next statement that -"ah but they got to chose it wasn't someone else s narrative."

Number one, it's not like film composers are forced at gun point they can pick and choose what ever strikes their fancy

number 2 most composers love a challenge

Again look up why Revel wrote Bolero.

Harpy
19th August 09, 09:43 PM
Enjoying this thread :)

Goju Joe - I've seen a small trend lately where movie scores are being performed by a symphony orchestra (eg. Star Trek by the Sydney Symphony this September 09). If music is made for the listener/audience then isn't the number of people in seats the best way to find out if 'movie music' can take the leap to the concert hall? I guess I'll be able to say more once I find out what the ticket sales for this performance are.

I appreciate your line of argument and do believe there is an art in movie compositions and definitely has its own niche and purpose. However I find much movie music to be limited, lacking in depth and texture and not story-telling but rather just atmospheric and used in conjunction with other media to evoke mood. Thus the music does not have to stand-alone (budget, quality, time comes into this and as mentioned, is part of the art of the movie making industry) and in reality cannot be judged and compared on its own merits against 'classical' music.

In all honesty, I wouldn't pay money to listen to the Star Trek soundtrack however I will be attending the London Philharmonic performance of compositions by Ravel, Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky. Great classical music inspires me to feel, to create, compose and make music. I find 'movie music' has never elicited the same in me.

resolve
19th August 09, 10:30 PM
I'm glad you are enjoying the thread.

I noticed that most orchestral pieces were being done in the film industry now (because honestly artists need to eat too and its not like the classical composition industry is booming atm) and are leaking into the game industry too. Deus Ex is still one of my favorite soundtracks.

What I feel is especially good about these new brands of music is that they are free to experiment in ways that classical can't because it is limited by its genre.

Agree/disagree?

Artful Dentures
20th August 09, 12:16 AM
Enjoying this thread :)

Goju Joe - I've seen a small trend lately where movie scores are being performed by a symphony orchestra (eg. Star Trek by the Sydney Symphony this September 09). If music is made for the listener/audience then isn't the number of people in seats the best way to find out if 'movie music' can take the leap to the concert hall? I guess I'll be able to say more once I find out what the ticket sales for this performance are.

I appreciate your line of argument and do believe there is an art in movie compositions and definitely has its own niche and purpose. However I find much movie music to be limited, lacking in depth and texture and not story-telling but rather just atmospheric and used in conjunction with other media to evoke mood. Thus the music does not have to stand-alone (budget, quality, time comes into this and as mentioned, is part of the art of the movie making industry) and in reality cannot be judged and compared on its own merits against 'classical' music.

In all honesty, I wouldn't pay money to listen to the Star Trek soundtrack however I will be attending the London Philharmonic performance of compositions by Ravel, Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky. Great classical music inspires me to feel, to create, compose and make music. I find 'movie music' has never elicited the same in me.

There's a ton of good movie music there's a ton of bad movie music, there's a ton of good classical music and a ton of bad classical music that we don't here because it's rare to hear crappy music from 1746

Chamber music was often played to be listened to and as back ground music.

There's a huge difference from Beethoven to some lesser talented individual.

Same thing for music in movies. It depends on the composer and film maker.

You everything that runs from the gamut of bom chicka waa waa to actual music.


Ravel, Rachmaninov and Tchaikovsky all had contemporaries you'll never hear because they weren't that good, for the great classics of classical music you have the process of what's good lasting and whats crap going away.


There are great composers working on film scores not just dun dun duh! type of stuff but music that stand alone and will stand the test of time.

Harpy
20th August 09, 12:27 AM
You're being very fair to both camps.

resolve
20th August 09, 12:27 AM
I think he has an excellent point.

Artful Dentures
20th August 09, 12:33 AM
You're being very fair to both camps.


I love all classical music

I'll go back to my Prokofiev example

Whether he is writing the Music for a Ballet, Romeo and Julliet, A kids piece Peter and the Wolf or a film score Alexander Nevsky the man was a musical Genius.

Saying somehow his score for Nevsky was somehow less because it was for a movie is silly.

Harpy
20th August 09, 12:43 AM
Just to make this clear, I appreciate classical music enough to play it, listen to it, do my own arrangements as well as listen to music of the composers contemporaries and even find out who their teachers were to see if I can find patterns in their works and inspiration.

Franz Liszt as an example, I couldn't get enough of Czerny's work (especially mastering the technique) knowing that he had a hand in molding that genius.

Ajamil
20th August 09, 12:49 AM
There's a ton of good movie music there's a ton of bad movie music, there's a ton of good classical music and a ton of bad classical music that we don't here because it's rare to hear crappy music from 1746.

Is that it? Are you looking at "Classical" music as a genre, rather than a genre of which we retain the "classics"?

Don't you think in 200 years, we will keep the classical movie music, and all the garbage or overly simplified music scores will have faded into obscurity.

Thus movie scores aren't the new classical, they are a new music genre that will have classics.

Artful Dentures
20th August 09, 08:29 AM
Is that it? Are you looking at "Classical" music as a genre, rather than a genre of which we retain the "classics"?

Don't you think in 200 years, we will keep the classical movie music, and all the garbage or overly simplified music scores will have faded into obscurity.

Thus movie scores aren't the new classical, they are a new music genre that will have classics.


I have tried to use the word orchestrated rather than classical to describe a style of composition that Mozart and John Williams share

Do you know all of Mozart's or Bach's peers from 200 years ago?

It's the same thing genius is rare in any medium.

But the point is many of the top composers of orchestrated music now - who would have been focusing writing on opera's and more "classical" genres are working in the film score field.

If someone is true musical genius (and they're very rare) it doesn't matter what the write for.

I would say 200 years from now if someone were to feature a concert of orchestrated music from the late 20th and 21st century a large portion of it would come from film scores or from works by composers who worked scoring films.

AAAhmed46
23rd August 09, 06:47 PM
I usually find 'orchestral' motion picture soundtracks to be less accomplished and complex variations on real classical pieces.

I like the original Star Wars trilogy soundtrack simply for the nostalgia it evokes for the awesome of watching the movies first time as a kid, but musically most of the key thematic parts are just slightly schmaltzy simplifications of Holst's planet suite.

+rep

Thats not to say i don't enjoy movie classical music, but the enjoyment IS more nostalgic then it is musical complexity.

Stick
26th August 09, 01:23 AM
Been re-watching this lately, and the music really gets me for some reason.

4nP5Gbm2XKc