# John Powell Score question



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

Hello All, 

Recently I've been studying John Powell's score (How to Train Your Dragon.) I'm trying my best to analyse the score with the knowledge I have but it seems almost impossible. I'll be much thankful if anyone can please give me a hand on this matter. 

Question 1) Focus Hiccup (John Powell from _How to Train your Dragon_)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8MR5jpK_i8
(00:22~)

*Attached score is in CONCERT

Previous to the Bar 17, String & Brass are playing repeated ostinato derived from C Phrygian Dominant scale (C Db E F G Ab B(b) ) 
At the bar 17 (00:22) music is at the climax and horns and trumpets are playing the melody based on C triad and B triad (Timpani playing G bass note). However, If we look at the winds/strings, they are playing the notes that don't seem relevant to C triad nor B triad. By looking at the score, there are so many dissonance notes even on strong beats but if you listen to the music it just sounds amazing. 
I understand that fast wind/string runs tend to get away with dissonance thanks to their rapid movement. Here, however, the notes winds/strings play seem too far from the harmony horns are playing. 
Any clue please?

Please forgive me for poor picture of the score. It's not allowing me to upload anything bigger than 128kb


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Apr 14, 2014)

lune856 @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> Hello All,
> 
> Recently I've been studying John Powell's score (How to Train Your Dragon.) I'm trying my best to analyse the score with the knowledge I have but it seems almost impossible. I'll be much thankful if anyone can please give me a hand on this matter.
> 
> ...



What attached score?


----------



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

Sorry just attached the score


----------



## ed buller (Apr 14, 2014)

It seems they are just playing another octatonic set e,f,g,g#,b,d,d# ( or part of) . This is very common in these sorts of action passages. Various parts of the orchestra using different set's of notes. Some tonal others not. Quite hard to figure out. Stravinsky and the russians where masters of this sort of thing. Where it all comes from to my mind. 

e


----------



## RiffWraith (Apr 14, 2014)

Sometimes dissonant notes work, sometimes they don't. Sometimes a person studying the score thinks a note is natural when it's actually a sharp or a flat.


----------



## Farkle (Apr 14, 2014)

If I were to break this down, what I'm seeing (the first 8 notes) is follows:

There's a four note pattern (E, F, G, Ab) whose shape is then immediately repeated a fifth up (B, C, D, Eb). I bet the orchestrator did the pattern first on E, then lifted the pattern and transposed it up a fifth. I don't think he was thinking of a scale.

Now, as to why it starts on E? Well, he probably wanted it to start on a chord tone, so either C, E, or G. If he Started on E, then he had an easy "transposition" of the pattern to the 5th above, which is a chord tone for B.

I will say that a lot of Hollywood textures involve the creation of a non tonal "pattern" that cycles around the functional harmony and melody. As long as you put it in different orchestral colors, and it's centered around some of the harmonic tones being represented in the "foreground", it works really well.

I'm pretty sure, though, that the composer/orchestrator thought of those first 8 notes as 2 4-note patterns, lifted and transposed, rather than some sort of strange hybrid scale.

Anyone know whom the orchestrator was?

Mike


----------



## Farkle (Apr 14, 2014)

Ah. John Ashton Thomas was the orchestrator. The man's got mad chops. 

Mike


----------



## ed buller (Apr 14, 2014)

it was Stefan Maria Schneider. It might be a pitch set. These are amazing. There is a great thread that Guy Rowland started about this score. I think it was called "action cues the bane of my life" or something.....loads of very helpful info.

e


----------



## ed buller (Apr 14, 2014)

here u go:

http://vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 71fd7c1696

"so you take a 3 note cell and turn it into a kind of a tune, and then make each note of that tune a minor chord. whack in some percussion, send it in and you can skip off to the pub. 
"



timeless

e


----------



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

Everyone, thanks for the input. It really helped me look at the score differently. 

Anyways, when the horns are playing B (chord) derived melody, winds & strings seem to play something totally irrelevant. Cello and Bass are playing Ab Bb E Db. I wish I could post the whole score here.

Just by looking at these notes nothing really comes to my mind. I understand that they didn't orchestrate in traditional way but don't want to think that they just threw in random notes. There must have been some sort of thought process. 

With the strings at bar 17, it's even more confusing. Plenty of m2nds and none of the notes seem relevant with what the horns are playing (nonetheless it sounds great)


----------



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

ed buller @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> here u go:
> 
> http://vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.p ... 71fd7c1696
> 
> ...



I actually read this thread quite sometime before and started digging John Powell since then. Good to see the old post again.


----------



## ed buller (Apr 14, 2014)

look for a pattern. so if you see "c,c#,d#,e" .....and a,g#,f#,f...they are both a [0,1,3,4]..pitch set. This set can be used where ever you want.....Very popular with film scores. Goldsmith and williams used them everywhere in action cues. Extremely helpful to generate dense textures against tonal themes. 

e


----------



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

ed buller @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> look for a pattern. so if you see "c,c#,d#,e" .....and a,g#,f#,f...they are both a [0,1,3,4]..pitch set.




Sorry but didn't understand why they are 0,1,3,4 I know they are sequenced in half/whole step. Looks like I'm missing something here


----------



## ed buller (Apr 14, 2014)

ok

this is fiddly but worth it. I only just discovered this myself but it's been a game changer. 

start at middle C...that's 0. so A pitch set ( 0,1,4) would be the notes counting in semitones from C .....C,C#,E.....it would also be available going down from C...so c,b,g#.....this is your available notes without transposing.

You can have as many notes in the set as you want. A maj scale can be described as 0,2,4,5,7,9,11. You could use a Maj chord as a Set ( 0,4,7 )...they are very usefull.

Hope this helps

e


----------



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

Farkle @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> If I were to break this down, what I'm seeing (the first 8 notes) is follows:
> 
> There's a four note pattern (E, F, G, Ab) whose shape is then immediately repeated a fifth up (B, C, D, Eb). I bet the orchestrator did the pattern first on E, then lifted the pattern and transposed it up a fifth. I don't think he was thinking of a scale.
> 
> Now, as to why it starts on E? Well, he probably wanted it to start on a chord tone, so either C, E, or G. If he Started on E, then he had an easy "transposition" of the pattern to the 5th above, which is a chord tone for B.



This helped so much. Thanks Farkle


----------



## Geocranium (Apr 14, 2014)

If I may ask, where did you get the score? I'd love to analyze it.


----------



## aaronnt1 (Apr 14, 2014)

Geocranium @ Mon 14 Apr said:


> If I may ask, where did you get the score? I'd love to analyze it.



+1


----------



## apessino (Apr 14, 2014)

Geocranium @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> If I may ask, where did you get the score? I'd love to analyze it.



I was going to ask the same... 8) It is one of my favorite scores ever, I would love to study it.

I saw John Powell conduct the Golden State Pops Orchestra in a suite from this score at the Varese Sarabande celebration a couple of months ago, and it was easily one of the highlights of the night. This is one score that sounds just as incredible in a live performance as it does in the film.

Amazing work...


----------



## Farkle (Apr 14, 2014)

lune856 @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> Farkle @ Mon Apr 14 said:
> 
> 
> > If I were to break this down, what I'm seeing (the first 8 notes) is follows:
> ...



My pleasure. Thanks for listening to me ramble and ruminate! :lol: 

Mike


----------



## lune856 (Apr 14, 2014)

apessino @ Mon Apr 14 said:


> Geocranium @ Mon Apr 14 said:
> 
> 
> > If I may ask, where did you get the score? I'd love to analyze it.
> ...



A good friend of mine who collects scores kindly gave it to me. I'd love to share this with anyone who needs this.(Hope that doesn't cause any trouble :shock: ) It's a special pleasure to look at the score written in CONCERT (yes finally) 

Please PM me I'd love to share this.


----------



## ed buller (Apr 15, 2014)

you got an excellent response from LUDWIG over at jw.

he does a great blog too; http://www.filmmusicnotes.com/

e


----------



## lune856 (Apr 15, 2014)

ed buller @ Tue Apr 15 said:


> you got an excellent response from LUDWIG over at jw.
> 
> he does a great blog too; http://www.filmmusicnotes.com/
> 
> e



Indeed. I'm about to ask him for the permission to share his post with people on this website. As soon as he agrees I'll post it here


----------



## lune856 (Apr 15, 2014)

This is the response I got from username Ludwig from John Williams fan cafe. I think this provides us great insights into the problem. I want to thank him for letting us share his idea. 


"This is a complicated little passage. The cue starts with the ostinato on C with a Phrygian inflection (the Db). But notice at 0:14 that the ostinato is transposed up to E, so now that becomes the tonal centre for the moment. Bars 15-16 show this, with E both starting and ending each ostinato figure, and again with a Phrygian inflection (now F-natural).

So with bar 17, the dyad (two-note chord) in the brass suggests E minor, giving some harmony to the ostinato. The D#-F# dyad that follows is actually a kind of "pivot chord" back to C, since they lead to E-G but now with C as tonic (as it is strongly in the bass - not shown in your example). This chord also relates to what happened at the start of the cue, not only returning to C as a tonic, but also by the D#-F# itself. Notice its appearance at 0:08 in the brass over the C ostinato.

The wind flourishes over these dyads help the music modulate back to C. The first half of the flourish essentially outlines the E Phrygian mode but with the added notes of Ab and Eb, which are also part of the E ostinato from the previous bars, but written enharmonically as G# and D# (see the winds in bar 15).

The second half of the flourish begins in the E Phrygian again but on its second note (F). But notice that the 3rd sixteenth of this second half starts to form parallel 5ths with the lower winds, and that on the 4th beat of the bar, the 5th is on C, a hint that C is returning as tonic. The last four sixteenths then form neighbouring parallel 5ths around C and resolve emphatically to a C major chord, reaching a climax just as C is restored to its place as tonic."


----------



## Guy Rowland (Apr 15, 2014)

Good heavens. He's a tricky little blighter, that Powell chap. He defeated me on the Kill Ring a couple of years ago, this passage would doubtless defeat me all over again.

In the end, I took heart from realising its buried so low in the mix of the film, he may as well played a multi from Symphobia. Of course that isn't really true, but its close enough to make me feel less pathetically inadequate.

Still the best blockbuster soundtrack in the past two decades. Hope he's cooked up equal brilliance for the sequel.


----------



## wst3 (Apr 15, 2014)

I've enjoyed reading folks analysis of the score, and I'm almost embarrassed to ask, actually I was but I'm going to do so anyway... and apologies if I ramble a bit, it's difficult to frame this.

I remember reading this fantastic book by Rayburn Wright titled "Inside the Score: A Detailed Analysis of 8 Classic Jazz Ensemble Charts" - and it is just amazing how he takes apart these pieces.

It isn't the first time I've seen this approach mind you, but it was probably the most complex, or it struck me as such because I am quite sure that the artists in question didn't do that analysis on the fly.

Or maybe the did? I'm having doubts now!

When I write I almost always start with something in my head, and try to get it onto paper (or into the computer) without spending a lot of time trying to figure out why or how it works. When I get stuck then I fall back on music theory, analyzing what I've already written and looking for solutions to problems.

Sometimes it is as simple as "almost" hearing it in my head. Sometimes it is really rather manufactured.

Every once in a while I'll tackle something that starts with a theoretical idea. Gee, what if I tried to write something that was based on a specific scale, or the bass line should be this particular pattern. It starts as a purely mental exercise. Sometimes it still turns out to be musically interesting, sometimes not so much.

The exact same thing applies to improvisation. On a good night I hear something that appeals to me in my head, and then I try to get it to get it to come out on the guitar. On an off night, when the clock is more interesting<G>, I fall back onto theory - use a pentatonic scale here (NO, not the dreaded pentatonic!!), use a Dorian mode here. And sometimes it is an academic exercise, can I solo over this change using nothing but a diminished scale built on the root of the key?

All that to ask the question - do you think that composers work mostly from what they hear in their heads, or do they really use the theory as the basis, or is it a combination?

Did Powell or the orchestrator set out to use four tone figures? Did he set out to work with the Phrygian mode? Did he think "gee I'll use 2 note chords and let the listener fill in the blanks? Was the dissonance intentional, or did it just sound good, or work for that scene?

I know that sounds like a naive question, or at least it does to me, but it is something that crosses my mind from time to time. 

Some of my teachers seemed to suggest that everything that was composed was composed on purpose. I still think that's true, but I think I inferred a far greater use of the mathematics of music. Perhaps I misunderstood them?

Thanks for humoring me...


----------



## aaronnt1 (Apr 16, 2014)

I am sure that John Powell or any great composer doesn't sit down and think all this stuff through before writing the notes down, they just write what feel right. Sure, they'll have some ideas about the structure of the cue, modulations, chords and yes maybe some idea about what scales to base their figures around but all the descriptions based in that post by Ludwig is after the fact and is just that, descriptive, which is not to say it can't be very helpful. Like when English Lit students break down a bit of prose, it's just a description of the mechanics of the language used there but 9 times out of 10, the author simply wrote what felt right in their gut, or have an immediate sense of these things already due to their own learning and writings.

I am certain that JP simply wrote the music he likes and which felt right to him. He probably has some musical traits that he likes to use and has an immediate knowledge of what sounds good in certain situations and just does it, doesn't have time to sit down and think it through like in the above post, just comes naturally.


----------



## KEnK (Apr 16, 2014)

wst3 @ Tue Apr 15 said:


> ...do you think that composers work mostly from what they hear in their heads, or do they really use the theory as the basis, or is it a combination?...


Of course the answer to that is a thing of degrees that varies from person to person.

However in my opinion, great complex orchestral music is not an accident.
Most of the more brilliant composers I know and talk to are well versed in theory.
They know "exactly" what they're doing.

Building blocks such as those being discussed here 
are an integral part of the structure of a given piece.

I find it hard to believe that it's by accident or instinctive.
If you are well studied, then advanced music theory becomes an indispensable tool.
Cell structure, motivic development, serialsm, diatonic modulations etc
are not different to a well educated composer than choosing what sample set to use.

k


----------

