# John Williams article -- short but fun



## JohnG (Dec 16, 2011)

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... iLeadStory


----------



## José Herring (Dec 16, 2011)

Damn that's a good article.


----------



## Gerd Kaeding (Dec 16, 2011)

thanks for sharing.
Very nice article.


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 16, 2011)

A good read.

Thanks for sharing, John!


----------



## Leandro Gardini (Dec 17, 2011)

He does not depend on technology, only on his knowledge. That´s why he´s still the best!!!


----------



## givemenoughrope (Dec 17, 2011)

Did Morricone buy the farm and no one told me?


----------



## MaestroRage (Dec 20, 2011)

very fine read indeed. Thanks for the share.


----------



## germancomponist (Dec 20, 2011)

http://www.goldenglobes.org/nominations/

Listen: http://vimeo.com/32558741

What a great soundtrack again..... .


----------



## SergeD (Dec 20, 2011)

"Lost in Space" with the Unforgettable Doctor Smith. Really liked that theme and the serie in my youth.

I don't know if Mr. Williams will score "Tintin et le Temple du Soleil". The first movie version, done in 1969, had a really good score.


----------



## David Story (Dec 20, 2011)

germancomponist @ Tue Dec 20 said:


> http://www.goldenglobes.org/nominations/
> 
> Listen: http://vimeo.com/32558741
> 
> What a great soundtrack again..... .



Good article, thanks John! The writer gets that technology is killing orchestral music.
The War Horse interview video here is good:
http://www.jwfan.com/

Confirms that this is a concert piece that also perfectly fits the film.

Gunter, the film is equally great. The most poetic Spielberg film.

Williams understands that film is where different kinds of music can happily live together. I hope orchestral music continues to be the "tissue" that blends different styles.

John Williams is conducting War Horse and Tintin at the Young Musicians Foundation Gala 2012.


----------



## mgpqa1 (Dec 20, 2011)

Thanks for sharing. Jurassic Park was the first time I became cognizant of film scores and it kick-started my interest in music study.


----------



## MichaelL (Dec 22, 2011)

David Story @ Tue Dec 20 said:


> Good article, thanks John! The writer gets that technology is killing orchestral music.



David, I respectfully disagree. The writer "gets" that economics (recording non-union in Europe) and popular culture (i.e., "younger / edgier") are killing orchestral music. It's the combination of bean counters and a young audience with different aesthetics, not the advent of samples, that is killing orchestral music. 

It's interesting to note that in a joint interview that John Williams did with Steven Spielberg, he stated that he doesn't really watch many films.

Thanks for posting John --great read.

Michael


----------



## David Story (Dec 23, 2011)

MichaelL @ Thu Dec 22 said:


> David Story @ Tue Dec 20 said:
> 
> 
> > Good article, thanks John! The writer gets that technology is killing orchestral music.
> ...



Disagreement is fine, as long as we make the effort to see the other persons point of view.
Michael, films have been recording in Europe to save money for over 50 years. That really helps more projects use live orchestra. I don't think that harms the art form. 

I do think that technology drives pop culture. iTunes, DAWs, etc. And you're right, young artists do imagine their laptop is cooler/edgier than a live player. And that does great harm. Most sample based music sounds tepid next to a live performance. And the public rarely gets to hear the difference. Samples are cheap, but souless.

John Williams doesn't use samples, but does make extensive use of technology. Newman, Powell and McCreary use samples, but not to imitate an orchestra. 

Poor use of technology is killing live orchestra. 

The live interview with Williams I linked to above is insightful. He values the performances. And Spielberg is known for shooting video of every scoring session, he loves it. So does Nolan and Abrams. I dig their aesthetic.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Dec 23, 2011)

Michael and David, you are both partially right IMHO.

Ys, Michael, " It's the combination of bean counters and a young audience with different aesthetics, not the advent of samples, that is killing orchestral music. "

Yes, David, "Poor use of technology is killing live orchestra."

The former is the serial killer, the latter is the Uzi.


----------



## MichaelL (Dec 23, 2011)

David Story @ Fri Dec 23 said:


> Michael, films have been recording in Europe to save money for over 50 years. That really helps more projects use live orchestra. I don't think that harms the art form.
> 
> I do think that technology drives pop culture. iTunes, DAWs, etc. And you're right, young artists do imagine their laptop is cooler/edgier than a live player. And that does great harm. Most sample based music sounds tepid next to a live performance. And the public rarely gets to hear the difference. Samples are cheap, but souless.
> .



David, I completely understand where you're coming from (although, I don't understand why you're on a VI forum where samples should be celebrated for their potential). I love a live orchestra. However, I think that you misinterpreted what I meant, and my analysis of the article. Jay, I think understood.

Recording in Europe is not killing live orchestral film scores -- it is the result of, or a symptom of, the bean counters' economic concerns, which also extends to things like wanting wanting mock-ups (to minimize risk) and, yes, using technology to replace musicians.

With respect to "younger and edgier" in the context of the article, it was referring, not to young artists using their laptops, but to the taste of younger audiences for whom a live orchestra sounds old fashioned, and in some cases out of place. As the article said, "The Hangover doesn't need an orchestra." 

As the saying goes, art is a reflection of the society in which it is created. Perhaps tepid and soul-less music is the natural product of our anti-intellectual culture.
On the other hand, I've heard plenty of "art" music performed by live musicians that WAS soul-less crap, or at the very least a reflection of a self-indulgent and tortured soul.


----------



## Gerd Kaeding (Dec 23, 2011)

I think one part of the whole equation is also the attitude ( of the production companies ) not to be willing to invest a certain ( and necessary ) amount of money into the music :

If you ( - _the composer_ - ) have an insane schedule , but less money available to pay enough people ( orchestrators , contractors , etc. ... ) to get things done , you have to make compromises .
And one compromise _can_ be using samples , which will determine what kind of phrases , lines , you can write that will still sound good , although they are performed with samples. Or maybe you start writing lines / phrases for a real orchestra in a way that will allow you to double it with samples ( ... I'm referring here to this endless "staccato parties" in the scores of the past decade ... ) . A compromise , I think.

Well maybe I'm wrong here , but this is at least how I feel about this .


John Williams is not just a blessed (_- and to me an incredible inspiring - _) composer , but he also has the opportunity to work with directors like Steven Spielberg who actually _do_ care about music , and who _do_ know about the magic music can do in story telling , and who therefore _do_ spend the necessary amount of money which then is at least helpful to get things done the best way .


- Gerd


----------



## rgames (Dec 23, 2011)

MichaelL @ Thu Dec 22 said:


> It's interesting to note that in a joint interview that John Williams did with Steven Spielberg, he stated that he doesn't really watch many films.



Cool! I found something that John Williams and I have in common!

Regarding the role of technology - it's the same in many human endeavors. The major advances in science, engineering, mathematics, etc. are still done with pencil on paper. They may be implemented through the use of modern technologies, but the basic ideas still emerge from some person daydreaming with a pencil in his hand.

rgames


----------



## jamwerks (Dec 23, 2011)

Or daydreaming at a computer. The important thing is the daydreaming (then capture that with what's at hand)! >8o


----------



## re-peat (Dec 23, 2011)

Sorry to wander slightly off-topic for a few paragraphs, but … I don’t really like the ‘War Horse’ music. I’ve listened several times to everything that’s available online and haven’t discovered a single musical moment which, in my opinion, deserves a place among the body of work that Williams will be remembered for. Not a single bar. The first time I heard it, I actually thought I was listening to wisely discarded cues for ‘Far & Away’ (which in itself doesn't rank among Williams’ finest work, I believe) and the more I hear it, the more empty and dull I find it.
One of the things that troubles me about Williams music of the last two decades is that he now often seems to select musical ideas which, before, would only be heard in the background (as counterpoint to the ‘real themes’), to act as the actual main melodies: secondary motives playing (and failing in) the role of main themes. I can’t think of a single important theme, melody or phrase in any of Williams’ recent scores that would have gotten the same status in his great scores of the 70’s and/or 80’s. I doubt that most of them would even be considered to perform any role whatsoever in the fabric of those classic scores.

Actually, and I don’t want to upset anyone, but for the life of me, I can’t understand how anyone who claims to truly love Williams’ best music, can also consider ‘War Horse’ to be great music. Because it isn’t. It really isn’t. It’s pleasing and effective music, sure, but it isn’t great. Not in the meaning that the word ‘great’ used to have when linked to the name Williams anyway. ‘War Horse’, to my ears, could very well have been written by anyone with the required technical chops, with a fair but not necessarily exceptionnal amount of talent, and who studied Williams’ musical idiom closely enough to now be reasonably fluent at emulating it. Because, other than stylistic superficialities, there is absolutely nothing in ‘War Horse’ that reminds me of Williams at his best. Nothing. It’s even so bad, I fear, that these stylistic elements (the characteristic Williams formulae, I mean) which used to work so well in the grammar of his music, now begin to tire and annoy me, because there is no longer any substantial musical content to go with it.

Williams’ genius (and it *is* genius, at least, it used to be), to me, is one of musical invention. The Williams I admire so much, is a composer who used to string one fabulous idea after another, almost effortlessy it appeared, and, even more astounding, gave everything a seemingly inevitable (and thus perfect) musical logic as well, and it is this rare combination — which I haven’t heard with quite the same depth from any other film composer, except maybe Franz Waxman and, occasionaly, Jerry Goldsmith — which makes him one of the great composers of the previous century in my book. And I don’t just mean ‘film composer’ but ’composer’ in the most serious and artistically profound sense of the word.
Listening to ‘War Horse’ however (or ‘Tin Tin’, or most anything he wrote over the past two decades), I don’t hear anything of that: no particularly memorable invention — take that main lyrical theme of ‘War Horse’ for instance, I mean, how bland is that? — and no breathtaking musical logic either. It’s all very well done of course, more than that even, and I don’t doubt for a second that it works wonderfully with the scenes it was written for — Williams’ music very often does — but it used to be so much more than that. So much more.

_


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Dec 23, 2011)

Almost every great composer, even geniuses and regardless of genre, at a certain point start to write music that is similar to other music they have written, not just Williams. It is true of Mozart, Bach, Ellington, Stevie Wonder etc. Beethoven is somewhat an exception but he died at what, 57?. And many geniuses who try to change, notably Stravinsky when he tried post-serial techniques on for size, do not do so effectively.

Williams is a 79 year old man who has been writing great music for a long time. If Piet is correct, and I do not have an opinion because I have not listened to he score or seen the film but people whose opinion I greatly respect like David Raiklen (Story) disagree, then it is hardly surprising and does neither him nor his legacy discredit.


----------



## Jerome Vonhogen (Dec 23, 2011)

I must say that I was rather disappointed by the article. :( 

After reading all the positive comments here, I was expecting a really nice interview, but instead it was more like an article by someone who has a friend who's cousin has a brother who once met John Williams at the water cooler. :roll: 

Did the author _really_ speak to Mr. Williams, or did he just accidentally bump into him with his group during a guided studio tour? To me, much of the article sounded like the obligatory generic cliché info one would expect to get from a professional tour guide. I didn't learn any new information, I'm afraid. If this was a genuine interview, then JW must have been very busy that day. :wink: 




re-peat @ Fri Dec 23 said:


> Williams’ genius (and it *is* genius, at least, it used to be), to me, is one of musical invention. (...)
> Listening to ‘War Horse’ however (or ‘Tin Tin’, or most anything he wrote over the past two decades), I don’t hear anything of that: no particularly memorable invention (...) and no breathtaking musical logic either.



Apart from the fact that 'musical invention' does not necessarily result in 'memorable music', I don't think I would ever mention 'musical invention' as one of the strong points of JW's music.

In fact, it's an old-fashioned and traditional (or even 'conservative') style of writing. None of JW's works have caused a Copernican revolution in film scoring, not even a paradigm shift. On the contrary, I would say, 'cause he kept writing in his trademark romantic style, despite the many changes in the industry over the years (like the introduction of popular music in soundtracks of the 1960s & -70's).

The way I see him is more like a modern day Rachmaninoff. A genius who is everyone's favorite, but who is still a traditionalist in many ways. But that's just my view.

By the way, didn't you like his score to Schindler's List? I think it was an excellent score, partly because of the involvement of the late Angela Morley, who happens to be one of my favorite film composers and orchestrators. Anyway, I was wondering if you had forgotten about this 'memorable' score, since it seems to contradict your claim.

- Jerome Vonhögen


----------



## David Story (Dec 23, 2011)

MichaelL @ Fri Dec 23 said:


> ...where samples should be celebrated for their potential). I love a live orchestra.



Yes! I agree. I love samples, synthesis, recording technology, sound design. I use them every day, buy new gear, and hire people to bring further expertise. I'm inspired by a new palette and infinite potential for transforming new sounds into music. There are great holiday sales from indie developers! They'll be in my new scores.

I don't agree that samples should be used to replace live players. My favorite composers, including people on VI Control, blend live and electronic sounds to making something unique. Teamwork!

I also believe that composers need to organize so the entire profession isn't compromised into making fake orchestra-substitute. Technology is a two edged Light Saber. This is a good place to discuss the future. How to use the gear well.

My experience is that kids, teens, and young adults all like the sound and feel of live music and live orchestra. Particular sounds and compositions go in and out of fashion, but audiences can be more open minded than certain producers in using orchestra. Orchestral sounds are part of our civilization, and evoke timeless magic. Williams is clear about this.

War Horse is a beautiful, exciting cinematic poem. I saw it with an audience of all ages, they applauded a LOT.

Piet, you are missing the music. The four main themes of the soundtrack are lyrical, memorable, inventive imaginary folk tunes. They are as brilliant as any, and more heartfelt and emotional than most of JW's themes. Melodies that touch sensitive tones via intricate passing tones, evoking celtic and hollywood tropes and moving beyond them. It's more long view, less cuey. No one else today could surpass their poetic evocation of gentle courage, natural beauty and enduring strength. It's your preconceptions, not Williams' judgment, that creates the disconnect you currently feel.

New themes for a new age. The counterpoint, orchestration, and harmony are all acknowledged even by those who don't get the themes.

It's great art music as a pastoral tone poem on hope and war, friendship and adventure, that also perfectly fits the film. It's a joy to watch, though a bit harrowing.
The last reel has an amazing range of earned emotion.

War Horse shows musical logic of a high order, every bar and phrase linked to what came before and what is yet to come. Anyone who cares about the art and craft of music will be inspired that the orchestral tradition is still producing masterpieces, for a broad audience. 

Williams always has harsh critics, many who changed their tune as they saw the iconic status and high craftsmanship of his blockbuster matinee scores outlive their complaints. Times have changed, and so has John Williams. He will continue to bypass critics and reach the audience directly. This is his greatest gift, the ability to musically speak to billions across time and space.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Dec 23, 2011)

I didn't know Meet the Press is his. It's one of the best themes I've heard.


----------



## jkrans (Dec 23, 2011)

David Story @ Fri Dec 23 said:


> MichaelL @ Fri Dec 23 said:
> 
> 
> > ...where samples should be celebrated for their potential). I love a live orchestra.
> ...




War Horse is the first score of John's in recent memory that I would call average from a thematic standpoint. I listened to it once and doubt I'll listen to it again. I'm sure it did its job and supported the film just fine, but its neither that memorable nor his best work. Anyway, you can't expect him to hit em all out of the park.


----------



## rgames (Dec 23, 2011)

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Dec 23 said:


> I didn't know Meet the Press is his. It's one of the best themes I've heard.


It's called the "Mission Theme" - seems like it used to be used around NBC a lot more. If you've never heard the full track you should check it out - it's really a great piece of music. It's one of my favorite pieces of his. I know it's on his "By Request - Best of" w/ Boston Pops CD.

rgames


----------



## re-peat (Dec 23, 2011)

Jerome Vonhogen @ Fri Dec 23 said:


> (...) I don't think I would ever mention 'musical invention' as one of the strong points of JW's music. In fact, it's an old-fashioned and traditional (or even 'conservative') style of writing. None of JW's works have caused a Copernican revolution in film scoring, not even a paradigm shift.(...)


*Jerome*, the invention I’m talking about doesn’t imply or assume it having to be forward-looking, pioneering, or groundbreaking as well. These last qualities, by themselves, point in no way to any musical merit in my opinion. Being ‘original’ is, in itself, not a musical quality and it doesn’t necessarily mean being musically interesting as well. Having a great musical idea however, does. (And the real originality of Williams lies in the exceptionnal, timeless quality of his musical ideas. That level of music-making, that power of creativity, is always original, even if it’s quite old-fashioned in its stylistic appearance.)
So yes, I’ll say it again: it’s the extra-ordinary level of Williams’ musical invention/creativity, the musical depth of his best ideas (of which there are a mind-boggling number, by the way) and how he weaves those ideas into perfectly logical forms, which make him, in my opinion, one of the truly great musical minds of the 20th century.

We’ve had this discussion before, you know, and I can’t really be bothered typing it all out again. I’ll see if I can find a link.
Ha, here it is: http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtop ... 032#230032

No, I don’t like ‘Schindler’s List’ so, no, it doesn't contradict my claim, it actually affirms it. 'Schindler' was one of the first scores of his which I found very disappointing (and it’s also one of his few scores which, in my opinion, harm the film it was written for.) 
‘Schindler’s List’, for me, is Williams at his least impressive. No wait, I'll rephrase that. It’s American music at its least impressive: it's _music disneyfied_. Immaculately crafted, but self-consciously appealing, shallow (emotionally unambiguous), using musical tricks rather than solid musical ideas, pseudo-profound and, well, melodically dull, I suppose. It provides the best possible ammunition for those who claim, like I sometimes do, that a lot of film music is an inferior species of music. If all of Williams’ music was of the level of 'Schindler’s', he’d be among the dreary army of forgettable film composers who give film music a bad name.



David Story @ Sat Dec 24 said:


> Piet, you are missing the music. The four main themes of the soundtrack are lyrical, memorable, inventive imaginary folk tunes. They are as brilliant as any, and more heartfelt and emotional than most of JW's themes.


I don’t hear it, *David*, I’m very sorry. I'm very happy for you that you do, but I don't. I hear almost nothing but fairly generic-sounding, tedious and laboured-over phrases and ideas. Postcard music. The appeal of this music feels so artificial and is so obvious (to my ears anyway) that it becomes flimsy and vapid. Everything I said about 'Schindler' applies to 'War Horse' as well. In my opinion, it’s one-dimensional and coquettish music, annoyingly and embarrassingly flirtatious like a drunk old lady can be. In Dutch/Flemish, we have the perfect word for it: _behaagziek_, which means: ill with the desire to please. 

But let’s be clear: the reason I’m so negative about this, is because I love and admire the man’s best music so deeply. It’s the intensity of the latter which causes the inevitability and intensity of the former.

_


----------



## Jerome Vonhogen (Dec 24, 2011)

re-peat @ Sat Dec 24 said:


> We’ve had this discussion before, you know, and I can’t really be bothered typing it all out again. I’ll see if I can find a link.
> Ha, here it is: http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtop ... 032#230032



I wish you had done so nonetheless, 'cause now I had to read through that very unpleasant discussion! :(
(I really hate that kind of personal fights and attacks in forums, regardless of the validity of the arguments.)

I must say, you are making a couple of interesting points which gave me some food-for-thought. However, I never had the intension to start an argument on JW's historical significance here, so I'm a bit hesitant to continue this discussion. Let me just say that I have been disappointed by some of JW's scores myself, but I guess this is inevitable with such successful composers like JW. I think it has a lot to do with the high expectations, each time a new score is about to be released by an established composer. It seems to happen with all the great film music composers from time to time, even with giants like Alan Menken! 

One more thing, I beg to disagree with you on Schindler's List. I thought that pieces like Remembrance were very effective, brilliantly orchestrated, well-constructed and sentimental at the same time. They fit the movie quite well, IMHO. If anything, it's the movie itself that has been overrated, not the musical score. I mean, how could the music ever 'harm the film it was written for', when that movie contains such overtly sentimental and superfluous scenes like the one involving a crying Liam Neeson (speaking of lack of emotional ambiguity!) :oops: 

Let's appreciate the fact that the man is still writing film music. Just don't expect him to write any score that will have the same impact E.T. had in the 1980s. Anyway, I rather have JW-on-a-bad-day, than some pretentious young imitator who will never match the technical level of JW's writing/scoring in terms of quality of orchestration, phrasing, expression, etcetera.

- Jerome Vonhögen

P.s. There's nothing wrong with JW's music being 'behaagziek' (yes, it's a Dutch word, just like 'coleslaw' and 'cookies'), after all, he is writing for Steven Spielberg! :roll:


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Dec 24, 2011)

First of all, if you pronounce a film score good or bad away from the movie, it is equivalent to pronouncing a woman beautiful or homely after seeing her naked but headless.

William's score for "Schindler's List" won the Oscar in 1993 and its place in history, as well as the film's, is secure and needs no defending so I will do none. People are entitled to a different opinion of course but history has already decided they are wrong.

John Williams is what he has always been, a great FILM composer. He is not a groundbreaking musical revolutionary and never has tried to be because few films would benefit from that approach and he understands that his job is first and foremost to serve the film.. At 79, he is way past the age when all but a handful of concert hall composers produced any work that was dramatically new in their oeuvre, he is unlikely and would be unwise to start to try to do that now.


----------



## David Story (Dec 24, 2011)

I like this thread for Gerd's "Staccato Parties", Jay's music Uzi, and Piet mentioning timeless music.

Hooks have always been more popular than long melodies. Once I thought they were dull, but now I have a longer attention span to go with the shorter span that technology demands. Williams is composing for the mass audience, that needs long gentle melodies in their lives, to balance the short attention technology.

I hope lots of people see War Horse. With Spielberg, Williams, and a huge promo campaign, there's a good chance.

Pastoral music, anyone? Goes with the Holidays!


----------

