# I'm too old for this stuff



## dcoscina

I have come to the conclusion that the direction that the music market is going is just not for me. I enjoy composing and have come to terms with the Charles Ives philosophy of earning a living at something completely disparate from doing music professionally (even though I just got paid for doing some copying clean up for an L.A. gig- still hate Finale BTW). More to the point, I just don't like a lot of what I'm hearing these days. To me, pounding drums and barely any harmonic development is just frankly boring as hell. Chord progressions are so standard and static I usually turn off much of what i hear about a minute into listening...it's a real pity. And rather than condemn those for doing music this way because that's what is popular now, I just have to reconcile that it's my own antiquated tastes that have led me to this juncture. 

I don't want to be too specific lest I hurt anyone's feelings but there is such a humongous divide between what film music or even concert music is now and say, Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet or Stravinsky's Le Sacre which I saw performed live a couple weeks ago and both floored me. I don't profess to be able to write like that either mind you but I went onto iTunes the other day and perused the various new or current soundtrack releases. Gosh, they all sound basically the same. Very generic and a lot of emphasis on tuttis and pounding percussion/drums. And mind numbingly predictable modulations...and little if no melodic/thematic development. Then I put on something like Jerry Goldsmith's Tora Tora Tora or James Horner's Wolfen, and I hear all the attributes that immediately speak to me and resonate with my ears....

Oh well, I'm not sure what responses I'm looking for here but this is my take on what is the dominant music sound out in film score land....sigh.

EDIT- John Williams' War Horse is probably one of the brightest spots in my gloomy outlook. It encompasses all of the fundaments of music and does a brilliant job of imparting its own narrative and emotional arc. Best score I've heard in ages.


----------



## nikolas

You do NOT gave to stick to film music you know... I mean why stay there if you don't like it? Even if contemporary classical music seems weird, I can guarantee you that there are very interesting things going on (probably the same happens with indie games and indie films). So get away from LA, and keep composing... to what you enjoy, and love!


----------



## germancomponist

I see you!

We have discussed abiut this some month ago in a thread, I think it was opend by Mike Verta, but am not sure. It is worth it to read!

The knowledge about harmonies e.t.c. seems to be nowadays not so important as the poor sound, big and bigger sound..... .


----------



## José Herring

I'm reading a book on Harmony by Hindemith and he's complaining about much of the same thing from his time. Only slightly different. He's complaining that music has abandoned all system of organization and that its off the rails and all his contemporaries suck, blah, blah, blah. He also talks about Fux and how Fux thought that music was going in a ghastly horrid direction due to the proliferation of those pesky instruments and taking away from the natural purity of the human voice, and that all music during his time sucked, blah, blah, blah.

Basically, at any given period of time a majority of the music sucks. Hind site is 20/20. We look back and we think wow, what a great time it was back then. But, we really don't remember that at least 90% of what the composers we admired wrote back in the time before they became great was just drivel. Then they made it big and got to pick and choose their great projects to do.

Check out the Great John Williams!!!!: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NW3UD3Pm5D8 

(oh, make sure you turn the volume up as loud as you can for maximum impact.)


----------



## handz

*Re: I'm too old for this *****

IM soooooo with you, only difference is I foudn this years ago - I hate how movie music style developed (more likely degraded) in last 10 year. Most people here know that Im a Zimmer hater but he is still "golden" compared to the many other nowdays glorified composers. 

" To me, pounding drums and barely any harmonic development is just frankly boring as hell" Exactly - I cant stand any music like this any more, I browsed Youtube for some game / movie music by amateur composers and it is all like this - drums as a main rhytim and chords bang bang bang nothing lyrical, emotional, harmonical... everything same boring experience...

If I would be 100% working composer I probably get crazy from being pushed do do music like this, so boring and painful..

"I don't want to be too specific lest I hurt anyone's feelings but there is such a humongous divide between what film music or even concert music is now and say, Prokofiev's Romeo and Juliet or Stravinsky's Le Sacre which I saw performed live a couple weeks ago and both floored me."

This is a serious problem now - most of the greatest movie scores in the past (not talking about Rozsa etc) Williams, Horner, Elfman, Godlsimith..... all were strongly based on romantic / post romantic period - melodical rich music full of live, emotions etc, but nowdays music is based on drums, chords and "weaving" emotion everything is just "sketched" but muisc itself is empty and boring. Just the usage of drums as a main rhytm tool si totaly lame for me - it is effective sometimes but it is very easy to do leaving the music empty and becames boring after while. 

todays movie mosic is getting more close to the synthy, electronic music so it looks like that the nevelope is getting down again to the 70s I hope that time when the large orchestral romantic style composing for movies became most popular return soon.


----------



## Resoded

*Re: I'm too old for this *****

I happen to love drums so I like modern film music. Though I do prefer when it's a scaled down a bit so I'm not struck by a wall of sound all the time. So in this sense, yeah, some tracks do get a bit crazy on the drums for my taste. I don't mind simplistic music as long as it speaks to me emotionally though. Or complex music for that matter.

I used to dislike electronic stuff too but now it's growing on me. I kinda like it when it's used tastefully.

There seem to be some elaborate hatred against the "Epic" genre on this forum though.


----------



## givemenoughrope

*Re: I'm too old for this *****

I love drums, period(.) And synths. And guitars!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... 4i9U#t=93s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aY525VgIJqU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Par-4JxEyw

Why don't you try to write some dense and carefully developed music just using synths, guitars and drums/perc.? The sky is the limit with that palette (and if you think otherwise, you haven't really dove in) and the mockup will probably be the end result. Who cares what everyone else is doing or not doing. Try it!


----------



## dcoscina

I was trained formally in orchestral music and jazz to a lesser extent. The jazz side is why I'm so interested in alternate harmonies/modulations. Nothing like hearing some terrific extensions to fill out a piece. 

I'm working on a little piece which started as a tango drum riff in STRIKE and a Symphobia 2 patch. I'm developing it far beyond that however and using the octatonic scale. It's kind of got a Morricone Untouchables vibe to it with a ground bass almost. There are a couple Goldsmith stylings however. I'm having a lot of fun with it and I'm mostly using libraries like Albion, Symphobia 1 & 2 and CineBrass Core as opposed to VSL or EW where one has access to solo instruments. I'm trying to prove that even though the main application of these libraries leans to the epic, big side, they can also be used in a variety of different ways.


----------



## rgames

*Re: I'm too old for this *****



dcoscina @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> I have come to the conclusion that the direction that the music market is going is just not for me.



Me too.

But I don't see the point in focusing on the fact that you don't like it.

Unless someone's holding a gun to your head and saying write this style of music, I don't see why it's an issue.

Write whatever you want. What's the issue?

By the way, the monotonous, melody-starved approach was in fashion in the concert world long before it appeared in films. Philip Glass, anyone? Also, do you ever read Gramophone? I do, and I buy a lot of the new music CD's that get their recommendations. 99% of those are crap, also, but different kinds of crap. The sad truth is that most music is crap, though for different reasons.

rgames


----------



## Gusfmm

*Re: I'm too old for this *****

D,

You're not alone in your feelings; this is a fundamental issue I conciously struggled with some years ago. Probably still do to an extent. However, my conclusion was that innovation and progress can only truly occur when we question the status-quo. Personally, I decided to utilize those feelings to re-energize the passion for progressing and making quality music.

I, too, share your sympathy for Ives' self-sustainability model. Long time ago I realized that music was not a profitable enough option to sustain my life expectations... unfortunately, I thought at the time.... I'm glad I did, even though the decision implied a trade-off on the time availability side. But many other upsides as well.

The last element I'd mention is that the world has become very crowded, in most aspects. So I retain no concern about fame and glory. In the end, very few composers have ever enjoyed much glory during their lifetimes, much less financial recognition. An exception probably being Hollywood-related music of past years, which has probably driven us to the considerably polluted environment of nowadays. I consider much more important the self-fulfillment side of it, and the self-accomplishment feeling in doing very well what you love to do the most.


----------



## dcoscina

Richard, my post was more of a personal epiphany. 

I think I was pretty clear in articulating it was my own observations and not an indictment on anyone per se.


----------



## Gusfmm

*Re: I'm too old for this *****



rgames @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> dcoscina @ Wed Nov 30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> By the way, the monotonous, melody-starved approach was in fashion in the concert world long before it appeared in films. Philip Glass, anyone?
> rgames
Click to expand...



Minimalism had (has) a very different approach and reason to be compared to the 'contemporary' music style referenced above. I don't actually dislike or critizise anyone in particular, I think to each its own. You can certainly perceive a huge melodic content difference between a Williams and a Zimmer, and they maybe considered within the same niche. Just different styles, different ways of utilizing certain tools. 

On the pop side I think D was refering to, I don't think music has progressed much from what could be heard 50 years ago. Certain radio hits nowadays are no doubt less mature than a Beetles song was back in those days. And I think this is part of what D was trying to relate.


----------



## gsilbers

well, i think its what you, yourself defines as film music and good music. 

because obviously its different for everyone. 


i for examples, don't mind john williams, opera or very complex stuff.. even dont like classical music whatsoever. 

but i accept the fact that most film composers love those things. as well as i accept that 
the masses like stuff like Britney spears, justin Timberlake and the like. 

but youll get work and get to compose music cause of your style so imo keep doing what u like and are talented for.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

I am with you, David


----------



## handz

gsilbers @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> i for examples, don't mind john williams, opera or very complex stuff.. even dont like classical music whatsoever.



Oh my... I wanted to ask what are you doing here, but my mommy told me to be nice :oops:


----------



## José Herring

handz @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> gsilbers @ Wed Nov 30 said:
> 
> 
> 
> i for examples, don't mind john williams, opera or very complex stuff.. even dont like classical music whatsoever.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh my... I wanted to ask what are you doing here, but my mommy told me to be nice :oops:
Click to expand...


I responded but deleted my post...because my mommy always said that if you can't say anything nice then don't say anything at all.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette

David, what you are observing regarding film music can be extended to popular music and to films. The reason why the film scores are generic may have to do with the fact that the films are generic as well.
Super hero movies are a dime a dozen... Hollywood and the music industry are run by merchants first and foremost...


----------



## Freds

_"i for examples, don't mind john williams, opera or very complex stuff.. even dont like classical music whatsoever. 

but i accept the fact that most film composers love those things. as well as i accept that 
the masses like stuff like Britney spears, justin Timberlake and the like. "
_
--->Coño Gishe tu lo que estas es loco!!! :shock: :D 



Most of the music, most of the films --_*most of everything*_: sucks...most of the time.
This has been the case since I remember, but of course we only remember the good things because those are the ones that transcend time.

I think there are plenty of good music around, but you have to look for it. But I agree with the OP in that you are gonna have to compromise some of your work if you want to make a living, unless you get super lucky and get jobs that let you be as free as you want...

BTW Not worried about so much music only having chord beds over percussive beds these days. It still cool now (barely), but people (audience, producers, etc) will get tired of this eventually and if this is your only chop, you might be in trouble. You cannot be a one trick pony in this industry.


----------



## handz

Freds @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> _"i for examples, don't mind john williams, opera or very complex stuff.. even dont like classical music whatsoever.
> 
> but i accept the fact that most film composers love those things. as well as i accept that
> the masses like stuff like Britney spears, justin Timberlake and the like. "
> _
> --->Coño Gishe tu lo que estas es loco!!! :shock: :D
> 
> 
> 
> Most of the music, most of the films --_*most of everything*_: sucks...most of the time.



Very true, if you have some sort of taste, but majority of people have that kind of taste that they can watch MTV all day for example, so it is hard to live in this world if you not one of them


----------



## choc0thrax

With lots of money on the line you get safe, generic movies and safe, generic music to go with it. 

I usually gotta wait for stuff like Aronofsky films to get music I want. The big budget exception is Nolan films since he lets Zimmer do whatever and Nolan is powerful and trusted enough that he gets to do shit his way without the burden of a million different higher up blackberry dependent number crunchers messing with the project because they snorted coke off a children's book about creativity.


----------



## choc0thrax

And I just realized that makes 3 posts in a row that feature small dogs as avatars. Nice.


----------



## lux

I'm not sure I completely agree with this.

With the exception of a certain superheroes, scifi or spy/police flicks which have a boring musical developement which fits your description, I think there is good material out there if you dare to look for it.

There is a melodic quality in many of recent scores, and often nice orchestration solutions. Not to talk about all electronic scores, which see the light once again after years.

I think there's pretty decent stuff. Maybe you could start a thread and ask for people to point you to nice examples, I would love to hear suggestions as well about recent good scores which I (in most cases) missed.

Orchestrating and writing the classic way will be fancy again, its a matter of time and a few "leader" score still to happen. Still one can enjoy what happens out there nowadays without feeling deluded every time a score does not sign our return to golden age writing, I think. 

Luca


----------



## handz

choc0thrax @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> And I just realized that makes 3 posts in a row that feature small dogs as avatars. Nice.




If you have had a Pug there it would be supercool!


----------



## dcoscina

I guess I'm just looking for something to inspire me. I have to look back at scores from 30 or so years ago to knock my socks off. I'm lucky that I don't know the entire catalog of Herrmann or Fielding or Schifrin so when I discover a "new" score of theirs, it's pretty amazing. I'm trying to fuse genres and styles in different ways. I try to think up interesting chord resolutions and work more with structure though that's my weakness as far as formal structures go. 

Anyhow, I don't lament this because it's fun. Like I said, I want to be blown away by stuff but the only music that is doing it for me is older than three decades.


----------



## Freds

choc0thrax @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> And I just realized that makes 3 posts in a row that feature small dogs as avatars. Nice.



Hahahaha... good catch!


----------



## germancomponist

http://www.screenarchives.com/title_detail.cfm?ID=7189

Compare this compositions to the modern scores..... . 

Opssssss:"What is a melody?" ..... . o/~


----------



## Hannes_F

Hmmm ...

I say, write what is in yourself and divide that from earning money. And if possible stop listening to music and thinking thoughts that make you depressed.

In order to be creative we not only need to be skilled but also to put ourselves into a state that makes things flow. For some it is the exitement of new possibilities, for some it is pressure of deadlines. Whatever you need you can get.

Indian philosophy as explained in the Vedas or Puranas knows three states of being: Sattwa, Rajas and Tamas. 

*Rajas* would basically be a quite active principle, the principle of desire, the appetite for action that leads to a result. If we look around we see many good people here that write because the new technology provides them possibilities they would never have dreamed of before. Sometimes the exitement is even greater if the training has not been so deep because arriving at professonalism with not so much training in your backpack is great and fascinating.

*Tamas* would be a more passive principle, or better the principle of suffering and avoiding the suffering. This is the case if we work in order not to starve, to hold the deadlines, to be motivated by pressure. This sometimes applies to those with much training. They might know their craft in and out, however in some cases if there is little left to discover they need a strong motivating trigger (an axe in their back) to get into going.

Of course things can be just opposite, or mixed.

Interestingly enough modern psychology knows the physical systems of gratification and penalisation, realized by hormones, allelochemicals etc. This is quite in conduct with these old philosophical ideas.

However the old philosophy says that there is still *Sattwa*. Sattwa means doing things because of insight. Not because they are rewarded or in order to escaping punishment, but simply because they have been recognized as the right actions.

This is all very short and rough but maybe it gives an idea. To do something (like composing) in the quality of Sattwa (which means because of self-conscious decision and not due to any outside trigger) requires the highest measure of self-discipline of them all because you don't have any forces of rush or stress in your back that push you forward. Sattwa is intrinsic to human being.

Just some ideas, and all the best
Hannes


----------



## rgames

I'd have to say that, in terms of genre, animated features grab my musical attention more than any other genre these days. Seems there's a lot more of the classical film score sound in that genre, or at least music that bears more resemblance to it than the "other" stuff.

If I didn't have young kids, I'd probably never know 

rgames


----------



## Dan Mott

That's why you should move away from film music AND start searchng for good music on any site you can find, such as YouTube, grooveshark, or even just listening to internet radio, but the radio programs where you can choose the genre.

Some people just don't search, then claim everything they hear is bad. There's great stuff out there that no one has even heard of. At first I thought it was a shame that all the good stuff I find isn't playing on the radio or advitised everwhere, but then I realized that what would be the fun in finding something amazing if you heard what you like all the time on the radio, ect. :D

Also. From my impression and what you've said in the past around here. I really think you need to get out of this whole "I can only listen to music from 3 decades ago". "Oh, there are no beautiful complicated amazing melodies and harmonies anymore". Just making a point. It makes you seem very closed minded to new things and that it seems you are certain that there isn't anything good out there. Like I said, why don't you just step away from film and find something you can enjoy just because you enjoy the sound it's self and doing this without focusing on melodies and how they are somewhat too simple and boring. JUST DO IT :D


----------



## Andrew Christie

Have any of you guys seen 'Midnight in Paris'? It is a representation of what a lot of you guys seem to be conveying through your posts. This longing for a euphoric world of talent from years gone by, nothing's ever good enough. It's quite frankly very tiring to read. This kind of thread continues to pop up every few months where someone has a teary because they didn't get their Stravinsky for breakfast, grasping for like minded folks to join him in his dismay at the travesty that is the current state of music. The reason why this is starting to annoy me so much is because it achieves absolutely nothing.

The thing is, with this attitude, it's impossible to be satisfied with any state unless everyone has the skill of a Beethoven, Mozart or John Williams. 

Yes there is a lot of dull and mindless crap out there, but as I sit here typing this listening to John Powell, I ask myself 'What's all the kerfuffle???'


----------



## Dan Mott

It's kind of like walking into a classroom of musicians. Some are classically trained violinists and same are electronic musiscians who make music out of samples, but all the violinists, ect, look down and frown upon all the electronic musicians and claim it's just a bunch of noise/very simple and aren't true musicians.

There are alot of Beethoven/Mozart/John Williams fanboys out there and that's something that annoyes me. They just can't let go of them and find something new. Seriously move on lol


----------



## Kralc

But don't the electronic musicians look down at the violinists, claiming their stuff is old and worn out and needs to keep up with the times? 

But whose to say that some of the violinists don't enjoy the electronic music? And probably some of those electronic musicians came to love synths from hearing switched-on Bach.


----------



## Andrew Christie

Dan-Jay @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> There are alot of Beethoven/Mozart/John Williams fanboys out there and that's something that annoyes me. They just can't let go of them and find something new. Seriously move on lol



That wasn't really my point haha. The great music of the past is incredibly valuable and should be praised and admired. I'll never let go of John Williams, he's been one of life long idols.



Kralc @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> But don't the electronic musicians look down at the violinists, claiming their stuff is old and worn out and needs to keep up with the times?
> 
> But whose to say that some of the violinists don't enjoy the electronic music? And probably some of those electronic musicians came to love synths from hearing switched-on Bach.



Exactly, musicians from any background, skill or genre can be elitist. I know a lot of guys who think they're too cool for orchestral music lol.


----------



## Dan Mott

No, but I mean. It seems as though when people listen to music, they will always compare it to something else, like John Williams and they can't let go of that.

I'd say I'm an elctronic musician and I look up to classically trained violinsts.

Anyway. I think I've gone off topic :D


----------



## Dan Mott

:oops:


----------



## Resoded

Though it's ok to "rant" sometimes. Blow off some steam.

I don't get the impression that dcoscina runs along all day hating everything new. 

Let's not forget though what a magnificent luxury it is to be able to earn money making music, and maybe even live off it, even if it's a style you dislike. It sure beats slaving in a factory 9 hours a day. Who knows, maybe you can take the style and turn it around the way you want it to be? 

Could be a creative challenge. Maybe ease off the drums a bit and add those sought after melodies and quality you wish for. Then your new style catches on and bam, you're a millionaire. People start asking for that dcoscina quality.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

I agree with every word you write dcoscina.

Honestly anyone who is telling you to leave or who disagrees with you, knows NOTHING about real music. They know nothing because they don't see what you see my friend.

They can't write a tune or harmonize so they fill up the cue with a bunch of sound effects, soundscapes/atmosperes, and drums, drums, drums.

Music is becoming dumb ed down by the year and I can't imagine how its going to in 20 years. Hundreds of thousands of young adults "composing" for film with not a shred of training or study of REAL music.


----------



## Dan Mott

Jeffrey Peterson @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> I agree with every word you write dcoscina.
> 
> Honestly anyone who is telling you to leave or who disagrees with you, knows NOTHING about real music. They know nothing because they don't see what you see my friend.
> 
> They can't write a tune or harmonize so they fill up the cue with a bunch of sound effects, soundscapes/atmosperes, and drums, drums, drums.
> 
> Music is becoming dumb ed down by the year and I can't imagine how its going to in 20 years. Hundreds of thousands of young adults "composing" for film with not a shred of training or study of REAL music.



This is just utter bull.

What's REAL music supposed to be? I'd like you to explain that. Also, who says that soundscapes and atmosphere cannot sound good, or means a track is dumbed down?

You are right about how more people are going to compose, just like more people are getting their hands on really good cameras and can take amazing pictures for an inexpensive price, not to mention that cameras are getting crazy on the iphone. So saying all that, those that will make it are the ones that can separate them selves from the masses.

Generally the people who "Can't write" are the ones that do not get heard of at all. This statement comes down to tastes to who can or can't write. I agree that there's shit out there, but someone is going to like it because of tastes. I while back I was saying stuff like this too how there is no good music on the radio and the mainstream stuff sucks. When I look back on that, I look completely stupid. I then tried to look deeper into the stuff that was on the radio and such and even though I don't like most of the music, I think those people are really talented and I know I'd struggle or couldn't even come up with what they are doing. 

There is great music out there. You just need to look and not judge by what you hear over and over again in the mainstream market. I know alot of people who love the top 30 and every single track that comes out, even though to me I think it all sounds the same. There are tracks that I love that I think is REAL music, but real music to me. I've shown tracks I love to some people and they have hated it and said, "Oh my goodness Dan, how could you like this?"

I seriously think it's just taste and someone who says something is crap is just an opinion, not a fact. I love music and I love a variety of it. I think you should look deeper into music if you think like that.

Not having a go at you, but seriousy..


----------



## Andrew Christie

Jeffrey Peterson @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> I agree with every word you write dcoscina.
> 
> Honestly anyone who is telling you to leave or who disagrees with you, knows NOTHING about real music. They know nothing because they don't see what you see my friend.
> 
> They can't write a tune or harmonize so they fill up the cue with a bunch of sound effects, soundscapes/atmosperes, and drums, drums, drums.
> 
> Music is becoming dumb ed down by the year and I can't imagine how its going to in 20 years. Hundreds of thousands of young adults "composing" for film with not a shred of training or study of REAL music.



Holy moly...

AAAAAAND I'm done for this thread ~o)


----------



## noiseboyuk

One more perspective just for the hell of it.

There's a lot of talk about real music here, "not as good as the old days" etc. Fair enough, in the main - there's a lot of similar-sounding stuff now which doesn't compare musically with the greats of old, I'd agree, though I'm wary of blanket statements - the oft-quoted example of How To Train Your Dragon is worthy of mention yet again.

But what I really wanted to chime in with is that almost invariably these discussions focus JUST on the music. My focus is always on the storytelling. If we're in the business of scoring to picture, frankly that role as storytellers is more important than anything. Sometimes one note is right for the scene. Sometimes the absence of music is critical. I'm personally less bothered by how musically rich a score is than how well it executes its storytelling function. And it's amazing how many good composers can be clueless about how to use their gifts for telling stories.

Of course, the greatest composers like Williams are genuises at everything, and the greater the technical skill, the bigger your toolbox in telling a story. Speaking of whom, another great skill he has that is frequently overlooked is the ability to imagine the final mix, to know if there's a spacehip taking off, he's better going up high to get out of the way of the roar of the engines. Or the incredibly simple but genius notion that if flying in ET, just have high instruments cos, you know, the characters are high up! That's the story-telling thing. Or in the Battle For Yavin in Star Wars IV (which is edited on the CD) there's no music for 5 minutes or so til someone crashes. Then boom - a simple horns motif, and into the rest of cue. Amazingly effective.

So he ripped off Prokofiev and some stuff is really complex - great and I do enjoy listening to that and being humbled by it, but it's his gift for theme and storytelling, _then_ combined with his technical skill that put him at the top of the tree.

I'll never be a Williams, but I'm so lucky to be able to help tell stories using the modest gifts I have. My advice - seek out good producers / directors and establish a good relationship with them. And if you've no passion for storytelling, try and find a different career than film / TV music - you'll always be frustrated as the needs for telling a story are at complete variance for the needs of a good symphony.


----------



## TheUnfinished

I have all sorts, ranging from Palestrina to Dubstep, on my iPod. Whose side am I on?

Honestly, every "things ain't what they used to be" argument is based on a rose-tinted fallacy. Utter rubbish and genius have been best friends since the dawn of time - there has been no period in history where people weren't churning out forgettable drivel alongside the classic works we actually remember. And there's certainly never been an age when voices weren't yelling "Everything's rubbish now, not like the old days".

To Dave, I love your music when you post on here. Don't change what you do because of temporary prevailing winds. But equally, don't feel you have to turn against them. Use them, find a way to make them propel what you already do.


----------



## Farkle

(Quote from dscocina):

_I have come to the conclusion that the direction that the music market is going is just not for me._

Dave, I actually had a kind of "epiphany" about that exact same thing about a month ago. I was working on a trailer-y, epic, cue, and trying to make it with big thrumming drums, electronica loops, and long, climbing brass, and I realized, that I don't like composing in that style.

(NOTICE: I'm differentiating between "I don't like writing" and "I don't like listening").

Now, I know that that style is very hot right now, especially in video games; and I completely respect people who can develop in that style... it's REALLY hard to get that sound _right_. 

However, what makes me _personally excited_ to write music is to think about the orchestral lines, and the harmonic progressions, and neighbor tones, and counterpoint. And the film music I love comes from the scores where the composers (I think) focus on that... so I made the decision that, I'm going to focus on what I love about writing in music.

And, the corollary is, if I'm "slower" because I do some more intricate stuff, or my stuff isn't quite as "marketable", I'm okay with that, because I want to focus on listening to, and writing, music that inspires me.

It's probably going to mean I won't get as many gigs, but I think it's more important for us (as creatives) to acknowledge that we LIKE to create certain ways, and then to support that like by finding, and experiencing, music that nourishes our soul.

For some people, epic music is super nourishing. I have a close friend who is an author, and he fires up Epic Score CD's and Lord of the Rings whenever he writes. He loves it. And I am super happy that there are composers out there making fine music in that style.

For me, I made the decision to nourish myself by focusing on scores that are meaningful to me. I've been listening to a ton of Jerry Goldsmith, and early Alan Silvestri; really getting that Silver Age of Film Scoring into my brain. And you know? It's putting the fun back into composing for me! And, isn't that what it's all about?

It also helps that EIS (which I'm 2 books into) completely supports and helps writing in that "Predator/Total Recall" style. 

Final comment: I am trying my best to not offer any personal judgement on any style of music. I love that in this world, people can create what they love, and get paid for it. And, no matter what, making a compelling piece of music is damn hard, no matter what the genre.

For me, I gave myself permission to focus on, what could be called, "outdated" or "non-marketable" scores, because I like the way they make me feel. And, I gave myself permission to focus on developing myself in that style, because I like composing a LOT when I compose that way. 

Again, just random ruminations from me. Happy Holidays to everyone!

Mike


----------



## Rob

Nice post, Mike


----------



## poseur

dcoscina @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> Richard, my post was more of a personal epiphany.
> 
> I think I was pretty clear in articulating it was my own observations and not an indictment on anyone per se.



regardless of any possible indictment, dc:
in regards to film-music & the-actual-job-of-it,
i understand some potential for real frustration;
even so, i enjoy listening to others' scores.

on a more positive note, i'll say this:
i have never "run out" of new music, ie music not made by me, to enjoy,
to this very day.

as well, i am not too fatigued by the world to stop producing my own music,
both within & without film-music;
i haven't ever seen much reason to stop doing so (to date, some 40+yrs later),
since it seems that it's life, itself, that motivates creative endeavour in me:
certainly not the jobs, themselves, and def not the vicissitudes of public opinion.

i'm 58.
i write for film, i play live, i'm creatively involved in many recordings,
& write as much as i can.
that said?
i try very hard to "pass" on writing-jobs that i can predict will become unsuitable for me, personally/creatively, within financial reason;
i do NOT always succeed, in that.

don't know if that helps, but hope it does.....
just sharing.


----------



## Rob

every word from you helps, Poseur...


----------



## poseur

Rob @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> every word from you helps, Poseur...



sincere thanks, rob..... i appreciate the positivity, much.


----------



## Farkle

Rob @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> Nice post, Mike



Ah, thank you, Rob! Just getting some thoughts out. At the end of the day, if we're not having fun composing, then we need to change either our mindset about composing, or change what we're deciding to compose. 

Mike


----------



## poseur

Farkle @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> Rob @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nice post, Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ah, thank you, Rob! Just getting some thoughts out. At the end of the day, *if we're not having fun composing, then we need to change either our mindset about composing, or change what we're deciding to compose.*
> 
> Mike
Click to expand...


and, practically speaking?
sometimes, it's whom we've decided to work-for
and/or the nature of the project to which we've committed ourselves.

sometimes, ya never know.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

Dan-Jay @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> I then tried to look deeper into the stuff that was on the radio



You...looked...deeper into music that is on the radio today. . . . . . .


--So you looked deeper into the same chord progression through out the whole song? How far did you get? 

--You looked deeper into the same beat playing the whole song? 
Congrats. I'm happy for you. 

--You looked deeper into the amazingly repetitive melodies like, Katy Perry's, ET "kiss me ki ki kiss me" or Nicki Minaj's Super Bass, "boom da boom dat boom da boom". 
I'm sure these are very hard lines to get to the bottom of but I'm sure it can be done.

--You actually found something to be discovered in the amazing use of harmony in Flo Ridas new single "good feeling"? I hear these chord progressions on ever other song. Amazing dissonance and use of harmony on this song Dan. I can see where your looking so deep.

The bottom line is these songs are for drones, hords of youth that are exercising their brain less and less, and its only going to get worse. Its just ear candy, brainless ear candy that the masses eat up...because who wants to think about music anymore. Mozarts, Bachs, and Beethovens are not setting the trends any more. Its no high school drops outs who can play C2(kick) and E2(snare) over and over and over, and this is transferring into the Film industry....a bunch of wannabes who play taikos and toms like there is no tomorrow.


Sure I think the stuff on the radio is catchy and I listen to it to stay current with the times(I don't want to end up like how metal heads only listen to 80's music)... however James Horner, John Williams and Jerry Goldsmith as dcoscina mentioned probably pity the BS that is coming from new composers these days. Can you imagine what they think of endless "composers" who can only compose 1/32 and 1/16 notes of high hats and toms, with 1/4 and 1/2 notes of Godzilla hits over and over. And some of you are mad at me that, that is all you can do? Atmospheres, sound design and drums?

I'm sorry for agreeing with the pure logic that dcoscina who has had the guts to put forth in this forum...which is obviously risky. But there is nothing we can do about the dumbed down music we can only go along for the ride.

All music has a place "especially" in today's industry, but denying yourself that a simply, common chord progress that is used in countless songs over and over and over...and you put that chord progress on top of taikos going 100 miles an hour and you think that is good, inventive REAL music??? lol I'm sorry but your a joke. Because music is art, and art is being creative, and being creative is being inventive.

The only thing that is worth anything on the radio that can be consider "good art" is the engineering.


----------



## choc0thrax

For me I'd say it's Williams > Horner > Flo Rida > Goldsmith.

Ke$ha would be somewhere between Goldsmith and Graeme Revell.


----------



## sherief83

Pretty soon kesha and Gaga will start scoring films and be adored for it regardless of the outcome...You guys better prepare to start writing concert music again...its going to happen...lol 

I think I'm the only one here who actually finds nothing being produced today or for the last 50 years is nearly close to the huge accomplishment of the romantic and impressionistic modern period(except for late Williams). 

I like today's music though, catchy and well executed but doesn't move me to tears or driven inspirational emotions which I continue to experience constantly to this day from the principle composers of the 19 and 20th century.

I think it doesn't mean that other people who aren't enjoying the same thing are missing out and idiots for not trying. on the contrary, i think that if you feel that the current trend doesn't swing to your emotions, its your job to show them what does if you've been gifted with the ability to create music.

You'd be surprised how many people will get the spark and understand you.


----------



## Resoded

Jeffrey Peterson @ 1st December 2011 said:


> Dan-Jay @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I then tried to look deeper into the stuff that was on the radio
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You...looked...deeper into music that is on the radio today. . . . . . .
> 
> 
> --So you looked deeper into the same chord progression through out the whole song? How far did you get?
> 
> --You looked deeper into the same beat playing the whole song?
> Congrats. I'm happy for you.
> 
> --You looked deeper into the amazingly repetitive melodies like, Katy Perry's, ET "kiss me ki ki kiss me" or Nicki Minaj's Super Bass, "boom da boom dat boom da boom".
> I'm sure these are very hard lines to get to the bottom of but I'm sure it can be done.
> 
> --You actually found something to be discovered in the amazing use of harmony in Flo Ridas new single "good feeling"? I hear these chord progressions on ever other song. Amazing dissonance and use of harmony on this song Dan. I can see where your looking so deep.
> 
> The bottom line is these songs are for drones, hords of youth that are exercising their brain less and less, and its only going to get worse. Its just ear candy, brainless ear candy that the masses eat up...because who wants to think about music anymore. Mozarts, Bachs, and Beethovens are not setting the trends any more. Its no high school drops outs who can play C2(kick) and E2(snare) over and over and over, and this is transferring into the Film industry....a bunch of wannabes who play taikos and toms like there is no tomorrow.
> 
> 
> Sure I think the stuff on the radio is catchy and I listen to it to stay current with the times(I don't want to end up like how metal heads only listen to 80's music)... however James Horner, John Williams and Jerry Goldsmith as dcoscina mentioned probably pity the BS that is coming from new composers these days. Can you imagine what they think of endless "composers" who can only compose 1/32 and 1/16 notes of high hats and toms, with 1/4 and 1/2 notes of Godzilla hits over and over. And some of you are mad at me that, that is all you can do? Atmospheres, sound design and drums?
> 
> I'm sorry for agreeing with the pure logic that dcoscina who has had the guts to put forth in this forum...which is obviously risky. But there is nothing we can do about the dumbed down music we can only go along for the ride.
> 
> All music has a place "especially" in today's industry, but deigning yourself that a simply, common chord progress that is used in countless songs over and over and over...and you put that chord progress on top of taikos going 100 miles an hour and you think that is good, inventive REAL music??? lol I'm sorry but your a joke. Because music is art, and art is being creative, and being creative is being inventive.
> 
> The only thing that is worth anything on the radio that can be consider "good art" is the engineering.
Click to expand...


I sincerely doubt the Mozart, Beethoven or Bach were setting the trends for the majority of people back in their days. Todays pop and hippety-hop and all that is the equivalent of yesterdays folk music. Something simple and dance friendly.

When it comes to what Williams and other top composers think. Do you know it? Otherwise I'd suggest speaking for yourself, since I suppose what you mean is that _you_ pity it. Which is perfectly ok of course, as long as you think it's worth wasting energy on. Speaking of what top composers "probably" think (because I suppose you assume they all think just like you?) and then in the next line speaking of having guts and speaking out gives the wrong impression. Maybe I misunderstood you?

Dumbed down and "real" music. As far as I've heard, there are people in all genres saying this, or similar things, about other genres. No one is right, no one is wrong. It would be and interesting conversation though if I could hear some proper arguments for the definition of "real music".

The last part of your post... I assume this is a rant and a vent and that you don't actually think like this generally. If not, well... they say respect is something earned, but I'd say it's just as much something learned.


----------



## choc0thrax

I think for anyone having trouble enjoying today's music due in part to it's simplicity I'd suggest doing what I do and listen to two pop songs at once. Not only does the composition get more complex and interesting but having two sets of intelligent lyrics just- I dunno, makes the songs feel kinda 'deep'.

http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... e=Skruller


----------



## Resoded

choc0thrax @ 1st December 2011 said:


> I think for anyone having trouble enjoying today's music due in part to it's simplicity I'd suggest doing what I do and listen to two pop songs at once. Not only does the composition get more complex and interesting but having two sets of intelligent lyrics just- I dunno, makes the songs feel kinda 'deep'.
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... e=Skruller



That's nice, but can you beat this?

http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... Name=Satan


----------



## choc0thrax

Resoded @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> choc0thrax @ 1st December 2011 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think for anyone having trouble enjoying today's music due in part to it's simplicity I'd suggest doing what I do and listen to two pop songs at once. Not only does the composition get more complex and interesting but having two sets of intelligent lyrics just- I dunno, makes the songs feel kinda 'deep'.
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... e=Skruller
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's nice, but can you beat this?
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... Name=Satan
Click to expand...


I don't know how I can beat it since these are all winners. I'm supposed to be working but here's one more.

http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... oop+friend


----------



## Farkle

choc0thrax @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> Resoded @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> choc0thrax @ 1st December 2011 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think for anyone having trouble enjoying today's music due in part to it's simplicity I'd suggest doing what I do and listen to two pop songs at once. Not only does the composition get more complex and interesting but having two sets of intelligent lyrics just- I dunno, makes the songs feel kinda 'deep'.
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... e=Skruller
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's nice, but can you beat this?
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... Name=Satan
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know how I can beat it since these are all winners. I'm supposed to be working but here's one more.
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... oop+friend
Click to expand...


This is STUPENDOUS. It's like what would happen if Charles Ives had a daughter, and gave her iMovie and Garageband.

Mike


----------



## stonzthro

Those links were well worth sifting through all the flames - love it!


----------



## Resoded

choc0thrax @ 1st December 2011 said:


> Resoded @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> choc0thrax @ 1st December 2011 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think for anyone having trouble enjoying today's music due in part to it's simplicity I'd suggest doing what I do and listen to two pop songs at once. Not only does the composition get more complex and interesting but having two sets of intelligent lyrics just- I dunno, makes the songs feel kinda 'deep'.
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... e=Skruller
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That's nice, but can you beat this?
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... Name=Satan
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> I don't know how I can beat it since these are all winners. I'm supposed to be working but here's one more.
> 
> http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... oop+friend
Click to expand...


You're right. This is art.

I shouldn't do this but... here... pure evil. Forgive me:

http://youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http% ... =Pure+evil


----------



## mverta

David -

Seek work elsewhere. Seek it in other mediums, and in other countries. After about my 100th validating discussion with childhood idols, I accepted that I wasn't crazy - music really does suck, now, overall, because basic skills are lacking. It's not a complex problem, but it's also not your problem to fix. Your problem is learning how to enjoy your musical life, and one of the defining aspects of that for people like you is that you have to quest for those who will help fulfill it.

Trust me. I spent most of my life wanting to write music for film, but it turned out to be a little like running towards the light of a star that had already burned out. What I really wanted was to write the type of music they don't write anymore, for the type of films they don't make anymore. At least not in America, in 2011, for the most part. I have two European films coming up - both with wonderful directors/production teams who completely get it, and the rest of the time I've been doing private commission work. 

What you can't do is give up. The rewards are worth staying in the game. Just learn to run some new plays, that's all!


_Mike


----------



## Ian Dorsch

Great thread, and some great advice. I'd chip in my two cents, but between Mike, Mike and Poseur, they've already covered anything I might have to say.


----------



## givemenoughrope

I second what Verta says. 

Also, if you aren't coming to this via a love of film, then skip the film part.

I think that there some great still happening outside of Hollywood. Alberto Iglesias ? Or Howard Shore/Cronenberg.


----------



## Ed

A lot of ignorant generalisations in this thread.

Big surprise!


----------



## poseur

*music* doesn't suck, right now;
that's ridiculous.
really.

saying that it does, globally,
is an aesthetic throwdown of ridiculously condescending proportions:
*"get off my lawn"?*

f••• all that, really.
really.


____________________________________________________________


some of it may suck, some may not;
it may, in fact, be different for me than it is for you, and different for her, etc.

are only talking about the easily, broadly "visible" music, here?

sometimes it can be useful to learn & recognise what ya don't know.
look around, and listen to more.
more.
try to keep an open ear,
try not to always seek out only those "great" musics that (somehow) must fulfill
_all _of your past stylistic & idiomatic expectations.....
_that's_ *the losing game*, imo.

try to stay open, maybe.....
but, whatever.

i'm sorry so many of you feel so strongly & negatively about modern music;
for a moment or 2,
i thought you were only speaking about easily-available universally-distributed Pop-Music,
but, even then, i def disagree.

and?
times change; they do. continually.
back/forth/forward/REVERSE/up/down/etc.

man.
such sad stuff, in this thread..... 
it's really depressing to hear so much rigidified dissatisfaction
for what other folks do in this incredibly broad & impossibly, richly-textured world-of-music.
unreal.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

One again, I read the same vapid arguments that there are no empirical standards to judge music by, it's all only taste and opinion. It's baloney, it's anti-intellectual, and it leads to the preponderance of BANG! BOOM! WHOOSH! type stuff we hear over and over now.

If it has to be explained to someone why it isn't artistically commensurate with the hard-earned craftsmanship of a Williams, Goldsmith, Powell, Newman, Stevie Wonder, Paul Simon, Bill Evans, Ornette Coleman, John Adams etc. then that person is always going to swim in that sad little pond.


----------



## givemenoughrope

What are the empirical standards by which music is judged?


----------



## givemenoughrope

Dbl post


----------



## poseur

i don't believe i've ever produced a BANG!WHOOM!WHOOSH! piece in my life;
definitely not in any film-score.

it sounds like it might be fun, if it proved itself to be creatively worthwhile.


----------



## David Story

Music of the time or Timeless Music.

The Magic Flute was a hit from day one. 
La clemenza di Tito was a flop, but gained popularity 40 years later.
Mozart wrote timeless music, but was hit or miss on music of his time. That's more about popularity.

"Bonaparte's Retreat" was not well known until Copland arranged it for ballet. A folk song can have a timeless quality, but it takes a great artist to develop it.

It Will Rain is #1 on iTunes today. Set Adrift On Memory Bliss was the #1 hit on this day in 1991. Does either have the potential for becoming Timeless Music? Something people will seek out in 100 years? Only time will tell.

There are so many eloquent posts here. Special thanks to Poseur, Guy and David. I agree that times have changed, and we've shifted attention to sound, and away from music. Music is so much more than sound, which is several reasons that I like storytelling music.

There is wonderful music in film television and games today. I love McCreary and Karpman. Williams just gave us another masterpiece. 

Most music will be forgot, even if it's popular today. If you care about music, you will continue to evolve the craft and attempt to make something of lasting value. There are objective standards for achieving this. Just study work that is timeless, and take only what you need from today.

Yes, I am aware of the "it's all good" and "you don't understand" schools of thought. 
Those folks need to study the old masters, they only hear music of the time.


----------



## Dan Mott

Gees

Jeff. You have a negative outlook in that aspect.

I'm not saying I like the music on the radio today because I do not, but It really makes you appreciate something you end up liking even more. You should find artists you appreciate. Same chords and notes? So what? They are very well produced and that's what I appreciate.

Atleast I gave it go, rather than saying everything is shit. Look at artists like Imogen heap, or Coldplay who have developed their own sound. I don't think they are shit. You just can't say that something is rubbish or know for a fact that something is shit because it's all tastes and we all know your tastes now which seem very close minded. It also seems like you can only appreciate something that is complex. I get so frustrated over people like you and the OP. WAH WAH, Jerry Goldsmith, Mozart, Williams, they all are amazing and create such complex and beautiful stuff and everything sucks now because it's all so simple and easy. I believe some of the best songs are the most simple, but most effective IMO. Just my listening experiences because if something sounds good, I'll just like it.

You are looking in the wrong places. I bet you have never actually spent time searching for new music you may like because you are so closed minded. 

It's funny though because I'm not really a fan of Williams. Why? because it's not music that I'd listen to for enjoyment, simple as that. I bet some people listen to Williams and Mozart simply not because they enjoy it, but because it's "so well crafted". What's the point? Listen to something you enjoy. Though if you enjoy those guys, then great. You find it hard to understand why people would like the stuff on the radio and I find it hard to understand why people get enjoyment out of Williams, though he makes really nice memorable themes, it's not something I'd put on my iPod and listen to it again and again and again with shivers down my spine.

Jeff. Sorry buddy, but you're a joke. Going with the whole "I listen and know what REAL music is" shit. Accept peoples tastes and move on! Music has changed peoples lives and everyone relates to it in a different way, whether it would be listen to the shit on the radio, or death metal, or even opra. You are the type of person I'd never want to work with musically with a mind like that. True musicians should be open minded to everything they hear and atleast give it ago, without focusing on how simple chords progressions are.

I have simply stopped being angry at the mainstream market. Why waste your time venting about it? Yeah, most stuff is the same, but just don't listen to it then!! That's the fun of it. Ignore all that if you hate it so much and just listen to what you love. There is nothing more fucking frustrating to me, than seeing people who don't have a variety of taste and claim a certain type of style is shit. I have a friend and she likes no music I show her and she only likes LITERALLY the top 30 count down. I simply just don't talk to her about music at all. DONE!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf

You know, good composers are always good. I don't see anything constructive in lamenting other peoples' bad music - there's enough amazing music out there to be inspired by for several lifetimes.


----------



## Kralc

David Story @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> It Will Rain is #1 on iTunes today.



I wouldn't complain if this was the #1 in Australia, this is what we have to deal with: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm94t0RJOS8

Yes, you guys are extremely lucky, I'd hear Bruno Mars over that kid _any_ day


----------



## lux

Yes, lot of generalizations, like Ed said.

Yes, like Poseur i would disagree even if speaking about mainstream radio aired teen pop. There's always some good stuff even in worst places.

Yes, i dont count music in number of chords and their composition. like (4 notes chords*8 variations)/Tempo variations. I still love a simple ballad.

Yes, it looks like i'm not having my own opinion anymore...i'm a forum parasite (o)


----------



## Dan Mott

Kralc @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> David Story @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It Will Rain is #1 on iTunes today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't complain if this was the #1 in Australia, this is what we have to deal with: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jm94t0RJOS8
> 
> Yes, you guys are extremely lucky, I'd hear Bruno Mars over that kid _any_ day
Click to expand...


My god... that kid....

Us Australians need to either go to the UK or America. We have such a small market, it's crazy!


----------



## noiseboyuk

There do seem to have been a LOT of these threads over the years. Always comes back to arguments over subjective standards of art etc which - whatever the rights and wrongs - usually comes across as "my Dad's bigger than your Dad".

I think where a lot of David's frustration comes from is impotence at the situation. With trailers we have no autonomy at all, and it seems that's often true in film scoring, with prescriptive temps from all the usual suspects. I loved Mike Verta's post - you find a way. Seek out and build relationships with programme or film-makers who appreciate your craft, and you appreciate theirs. I think the goal of scoring the big blockbusters is unrealistic for most of us and also - in the main - a path to a pretty unhappy and frustrating life, scoring unoriginal wannabe movies with ever increasing budgets and pressures.

Incidentally, Australia has always had a great pop scene I've always thought. Love Pnau and Ladyhawke meself. I used to love INXS back in the days before they were a global band - Shabooh Shabaah and The Swing, classic stuff. Then of course it all went a bit wrong. Almost 30 years on, I'm still listening to those early albums.


----------



## Kralc

The Arias confirmed that fact for me: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFKRJn6aKAc

Uggghhhhhhh.


----------



## TheUnfinished

And when the conversation/argument starts comparing Maroon 5 to Korngold, all is lost...

They're not trying to do the same thing. It's like trying to compare the plot of Kafka's The Trial to the plot of Horace Goes Skiing. Utterly idiotic and bereft of context.

If you can't find amazing and breath-taking music that's being made right now, everywhere across the world, there is only one conclusion: you are not looking.


----------



## Danny_Owen

Instead of focussing on the negatives I'm going to contribute a list of scores from the past decade that have really moved me or I've thought were brilliantly written or designed and have absolutely captured the essence of the movie. Hopefully more people can add to this list as this is just off the top of my head. These may not be the most complex scores ever, but I like to think they all have/had something about them.

Atonement- Marianelli
How to Train Your Dragon - Powell
Gladiator - Zimmer
The Dark Knight - Zimmer (Yes, far too many sound-a-likes have ruined this, but conceptually I thought it was brilliant)
Benjamin Button - Desplat
Harry Potter - The Deathly Hallows Part II - Desplat
Harry Potter 1-3 - John Williams
The Lord of the Rings Trilogy - Shore
Oceans 11-13 (particularly 12 imho)- David Holmes
Blood Diamond (Yes, this is a prime candidate for the 'big drums' argument, but it was arguable one of the first to really take it to another level and at the time of release was quite spectacular) - James Newton Howard
The Mummy Returns - Alan Silvestri (first one wasn't within the last decade!)

If anyone has extras feel free to add.

I don't think that film music is dead by any sense of the word. Yes, there are many rip offs and sound-a-like scores these days, but I'm not sure whether that's been any different in any other decade, and currently in vogue is action sequences involving drums. There continue to be a few pioneers who will take music to new places every now and then (Zimmer, Newman and Newton-Howard for example), and there are some phenomenal harmonic composers around (Marco Beltrami is simply awesome), as well as more lyrical kind of guys such as Desplat and Marianelli. 

I expect I'll get shot down because some of the composers I've listed harmonically are not being that intricate or complex- but they differentiate themselves with the palette of sounds they come up more than anything, and that is their selling point.

It's also worth remember that films these days are very different. Watch Taxi Driver or Once Upon a Time in America- these films can have such brilliant music because there is so much time for it! Films these days try to pack more action/dialogue etc into the film, and the music naturally cannot flourish as much. There's rarely much room for the music to truly breath, as any prolonged piece of footage not involving dialogue will tend to get cut lest the film become too 'slow paced'. Fashions change, maybe this will be something that changes again one day.

Besides- the point that no-one out there is making interesting, complex music so it's not worth being in film music is moot if you can do it yourself and it'll work to the picture in a way that the director is happy with. Perhaps I'm not experienced enough to know this for sure but I don't think directors have a problem any complexity in writing so long as it helps the film along as opposed to fighting it. So it really does depend on what you're scoring as well.


----------



## noiseboyuk

The Village - James Newton Howard
LOST - Michael Giacchino
The Incredibles - Michael Giacchino
A Very Long Engagement - Angelo Badalamenti


----------



## dedersen

I'd add The Last Airbender and Lady In The Water, both by James Newton Howard. Amazing how JNH keeps being able to supply excellent scores for the endless piles of crap that M. Night Shyamalan seems intent on providing.


----------



## poseur

Nick Batzdorf @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> *I don't see anything constructive in lamenting other peoples' bad music - there's enough amazing music out there to be inspired by for several lifetimes.*


----------



## poseur

since this thread has gone so far afield from its beginnings, already,
here's one of my favorite old pop-tunes;
it doesn't remind me at all of john williams, hans zimmer or whatever recording
is currently iTunes' #1 seller:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJDd49R6ZIU


----------



## Ed

givemenoughrope @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> What are the empirical standards by which music is judged?



I've asked that many times before, never got any kind of answer so I'm not going to try anymore.

We've been over this argument many times on this forum so i don't really want to have the same fight over and over so I'll let others do it. I do want to say however that I *do* happen to think there is at least one objective measure with which to judge how good music is. That is the mathematically correct way of writing music and its probably fair to say most people in the other camp are judging music by. 

To me it is a worthy endeavor, but its still a means to an end. We can point to various composers that probably everyone in this thread will be able to agree is great, however if that music didnt "move" anyone emotionally then what good would it be? I suggest that most mathematically perfect or complicated music that doesn't emotionally move anyone is worthless except as an intellectual curiosity. Such music could be programmed into some AI computer program. 

While Beethoven and Mozart were brilliant composers they were brilliant *not just *because they wrote mathetically great music but because they understood how to *use *that to create an emotive reaction in others. People here complaining about film music today would probably say Williams was and is a great composer, however while he really knows his stuff he *ALSO* knows how to *USE *that to really grab that special something inside people and really understands how to write for film which is a very specific and different skill to writing good music. We don't know if Beethoven or Mozart would have had this skill, maybe they would have been terrible film composers if alive today. Williams is great because he is the *whole *package and therefore perfect composer for film.

*EDIT:
*
It is true that a lot of new composers just think they can take a few big hits a few string stabs and think they are writing good stuff, but equally i see composers out of some music school degree write some apparently sophisticated music that just falls completely flat because while technically correct they have no talent for or have not learnt how to use all those skills to create a real emotional response in the listener. Therefore music that is "simpler" like someone like Zimmer will create a far more emotive response in people where that is the entire goal from that start and to get there by means necessary is fine. In other words these people have missed the point, theres no point having great "correct" harmonies, complex counterpoint etc if it doesnt have that as the goal. There is also a lot of people that can do a decent rip off of Williams, but they lack something, something Williams is so good at. His amazing tunes, his ability to capture the spirit of the film. etc. There is more to great music than just the mathematically correct.

Also it appears a lot of people here hear drums electronics and synths and see no musical value in them at all, so when they hear a piece of music with these elements they immediately hear nothing. That is why people here talk about "bang woosh" music. They simply don't hear anything but that. Its like if you have grandparents saying that all rock music is "just noise". There *are *other ways to think about music. Bear McCreary is for sure a brilliant composer, he has written a lot of music that the people Im talking about in this thread would say is good, but he has also written music that is just percussion and electronics (like a lot of but not all of Battlestar Galactica music) To me again I see him as the whole package. He knows how to write for film, he knows how to create an emotional response in the listener and he knows how to use his formal training to really create something special. Therefore I see composers like him as understanding music at a deeper level than apparently a lot of people in this thread bemoaning film music these days and thats why I always facepalm so hard reading so many ignorant shortsighted opinions expressed in such an intellectually superior snobbish manor.


----------



## Ed

poseur @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> since this thread has gone so far afield from its beginnings, already,
> here's one of my favorite old pop-tunes;
> it doesn't remind me at all of john williams, hans zimmer or whatever recording
> is currently iTunes' #1 seller:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJDd49R6ZIU



Weird. I dont understand how it can be a best seller while only have a few thousand hits on youtube.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

Based on this video, I would say that the future of melody is in very good, albeit tiny and pudgy hands:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zvJiSf2jz8

That's right: 16 weeks old.


----------



## SergeD

Nick Batzdorf @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> You know, good composers are always good. I don't see anything constructive in lamenting other peoples' bad music - there's enough amazing music out there to be inspired by for several lifetimes.



+1

Gustav Holst is dead and there will be no more Gustav Holst. Music and Film industries are in the same boat. 

We see people totally dedicated to art while others smell opportunities to make money and, why not, having some fun with young movie stars or singers prospects.

Everything in life is a starting over cycle. There is actually a trend around the 50's Malt Shop music and some songs really bring a breath of fresh air to this kind of music. In about 10 years, Pink Floyd bands will arise and announce a new Jurrasic era like the ones in 1967-1975 and 1900-1920.


----------



## poseur

Ed @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> poseur @ Fri Dec 02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> since this thread has gone so far afield from its beginnings, already,
> here's one of my favorite old pop-tunes;
> it doesn't remind me at all of john williams, hans zimmer or whatever recording
> is currently iTunes' #1 seller:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJDd49R6ZIU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weird. I dont understand how it can be a best seller while only have a few thousand hits on youtube.
Click to expand...


nothing weird about it, at all, ed.....
there _are_ densely populated regions in the world that are not the usa, europe, the uk, aus, nz etc,
where people create & listen to music..... just in case you hadn't noticed.

isn't that why g-d invented the internet?
in order to more easily expand our horizons, and to help us to enrich our lives?
i certainly thought so, but i've been wrong, before, too.


----------



## Ed

poseur @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> Ed @ Fri Dec 02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> poseur @ Fri Dec 02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> since this thread has gone so far afield from its beginnings, already,
> here's one of my favorite old pop-tunes;
> it doesn't remind me at all of john williams, hans zimmer or whatever recording
> is currently iTunes' #1 seller:
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJDd49R6ZIU
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Weird. I dont understand how it can be a best seller while only have a few thousand hits on youtube.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> nothing weird about it, at all, ed.....
> there _are_ densely populated regions in the world that are not the usa, europe, the uk, aus, nz etc,
> where people create & listen to music..... just in case you hadn't noticed.
> 
> isn't that why g-d invented the internet?
> in order to more easily expand our horizons, and to help us to enrich our lives?
> i certainly thought so, but i've been wrong, before, too.
Click to expand...


My point is if these people can't use the internet to look at youtube, then how did they download itunes music? Theres plenty of wildly popular bollywood songs on youtube, that makes sense to me.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Ed @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> What are the empirical standards by which music is judged?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've asked that many times before, never got any kind of answer so I'm not going to try anymore.
> 
> We've been over this argument many times on this forum so i don't really want to have the same fight over and over so I'll let others do it. I do want to say however that I *do* happen to think there is at least one objective measure with which to judge how good music is. That is the mathematically correct way of writing music and its probably fair to say most people in the other camp are judging music by.
> 
> To me it is a worthy endeavor, but its still a means to an end. We can point to various composers that probably everyone in this thread will be able to agree is great, however if that music didnt "move" anyone emotionally then what good would it be? I suggest that most mathematically perfect or complicated music that doesn't emotionally move anyone is worthless except as an intellectual curiosity. Such music could be programmed into some AI computer program.
> 
> While Beethoven and Mozart were brilliant composers they were brilliant *not just *because they wrote mathetically great music but because they understood how to *use *that to create an emotive reaction in others. People here complaining about film music today would probably say Williams was and is a great composer, however while he really knows his stuff he *ALSO* knows how to *USE *that to really grab that special something inside people and really understands how to write for film which is a very specific and different skill to writing good music. We don't know if Beethoven or Mozart would have had this skill, maybe they would have been terrible film composers if alive today. Williams is great because he is the *whole *package and therefore perfect composer for film.
> 
> *EDIT:
> *
> It is true that a lot of new composers just think they can take a few big hits a few string stabs and think they are writing good stuff, but equally i see composers out of some music school degree write some apparently sophisticated music that just falls completely flat because while technically correct they have no talent for or have not learnt how to use all those skills to create a real emotional response in the listener. Therefore music that is "simpler" like someone like Zimmer will create a far more emotive response in people where that is the entire goal from that start and to get there by means necessary is fine. In other words these people have missed the point, theres no point having great "correct" harmonies, complex counterpoint etc if it doesnt have that as the goal. There is also a lot of people that can do a decent rip off of Williams, but they lack something, something Williams is so good at. His amazing tunes, his ability to capture the spirit of the film. etc. There is more to great music than just the mathematically correct.
> 
> Also it appears a lot of people here hear drums electronics and synths and see no musical value in them at all, so when they hear a piece of music with these elements they immediately hear nothing. That is why people here talk about "bang woosh" music. They simply don't hear anything but that. Its like if you have grandparents saying that all rock music is "just noise". There *are *other ways to think about music. Bear McCreary is for sure a brilliant composer, he has written a lot of music that the people Im talking about in this thread would say is good, but he has also written music that is just percussion and electronics (like a lot of but not all of Battlestar Galactica music) To me again I see him as the whole package. He knows how to write for film, he knows how to create an emotional response in the listener and he knows how to use his formal training to really create something special. Therefore I see composers like him as understanding music at a deeper level than apparently a lot of people in this thread bemoaning film music these days and thats why I always facepalm so hard reading so many ignorant shortsighted opinions expressed in such an intellectually superior snobbish manor.
Click to expand...


Percussion cues that bang and whoosh in the hands of a guy like Bear McCreary is one thing but few of the people creating this stuff that I hear in trailers and video games are on his level. And as you point out, it is partly because he is trained and knowledgeable enough to write other genres as well, while many creating this kind of stuff are not.

And I do think that film music as a whole is still in better shape than trailer, video game, and pop music. A lot (not all) of the trailer music I hear, as well as the fx, are practically interchangeable from one to the other and make little statement about the project.


----------



## poseur

Ed @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> My point is if these people can't use the internet to look at youtube, then how did they download itunes music? Theres plenty of wildly popular bollywood songs on youtube, that makes sense to me.



i have this (indonesian) best-selling pop-recording on cassette, printed in 1990;
15 yrs ago, i got it on cd.

if you'd like to see the actual sales-figures,
i'm sure you can find an authoritative & reliable source to verify for you that this was,
indeed,
a "hit".


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

The $$$ people in the studios can't talk music. So melody and harmony are flushed. That way, they can just rely on comments about speed, as in faster/slower (rhythm) and loudness (dynamics). Synths are more popular for scoring because they are more prevalent in pop music these days. On a positive note, those of us who can do more than rhythm/sfx will have a big leg up when melody eventually makes a comeback (it's all about cycles, n'est-ce pas?), and can presently offer something 'different' for those directors who want to stand out.

PS: I'm very lucky to be starting a long-term gig doing a dramatic series that will require melodic, subtle work. No big percs for me for a long while. 8)


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Ned Bouhalassa @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> The $$$ people in the studios can't talk music. So melody and harmony are flushed. That way, they can just rely on comments about speed, as in faster/slower (rhythm) and loudness (dynamics). Synths are more popular for scoring because they are more prevalent in pop music these days. On a positive note, those of us who can do more than rhythm/sfx will have a big leg up when melody eventually makes a comeback (it's all about cycles, n'est-ce pas?), and can presently offer something 'different' for those directors who want to stand out.
> 
> PS: I'm very lucky to be starting a long-term gig doing a dramatic series that will require melodic, subtle work. No big percs for me for a long while. 8)



I envy you Ned, bonne chance.


----------



## dcoscina

A couple things- I was mostly relating my sentiments regarding the quality of orchestral music whether it's in film and to a lesser extent, concert hall. This democratization of music is all well and good (heaven knows it's better for kids to be playing with GB or loops or whatever than making trouble on the streets!) but there are still some avenues or music styles that demand some technique and this is where I'm just not hearing it. Technique is not there to analyze and be cool. It's a system that has evolved over centuries and refined by masters of music for a reason- because it strengthens the end product. I don't think I'd expect Tangerine Dream to employ 5th species counterpoint but I certainly love hearing a fugal setting of a tune on an Emerson Lake and Palmer disc. 

I'm sure I'm not the only one who is confounded or perhaps frustrated but the junk he hears that passes for orchestral music. You've got people posting these epic tunes on YouTube or even game scores that are just an affront to orchestral music. If a person wants to write in other forms like jazz or rock or reaggae or whatever, fine, then there isn't the imposed ideology because they don't necessitate it. But for crying out loud- do you think Adler, Piston, Rimsky Korsakov and Kenan wrote books just for the fun of it? And we're only talking about the arranging part of orchestral music. Let's not even get into the musicality. 

Anyone who asks me what's the best way to learn orchestration I say 2 things- go to the library, take out a conductor's score, and listen to the music whilst looking over what's happening. Also, LIVE PERFORMANCES. Recordings are fine and dandy but they don't translate exactly what happens in a live hall setting. Even if a person never wants to write for concert hall, it's imperative that they know how to balance instruments and such. 

Again, I don't impose this credo onto all styles of music and I love listening to a lot of different things. I'm just disillusioned with orchestral writing largely for film these days. It seems incompetent and in LA you don't even know who wrote what. Sometimes the orchestrators are doing most of the work. 

I recall a story about Herrmann giving Goldsmith a hard time for using orchestrators, though on another occasion he charged onto the stage during a recording session and told Jerry that that particular cue was too good for the movie it accompanied and for him to keep it for himself. God love Benny.


----------



## dcoscina

I will add that someone like Jonny Greenwood really interests me. His scores to There Will be Blood and Norwegian Wood are some of the best music I've heard written for film in the last couple decades because it doesn't sound like film music- it sounds like concert music. Desplat is also fine though he's writing too many scores and I think he's going to burn out. 

I like Powell a lot- not all of his choices resonate with me but at least he sounds like he actually gives a damn about writing good music. I know Hans does too and if he was the only one doing that kind of sound, I'd be groovy with it because it's HIS sound. I cannot stand the wannabes. I don't think Hans does either from all accounts...

To be honest, I do think it's the system more than anything else. Williams' most recent scores are refreshing but they still aren't at the calibre of Superman, Hook, E.T., even Angela's Ashes. A lot has changed over the past 5 years. James Newton Howard always knocked my socks off with his scores to Shyamalan's films but Last Airbender was pretty stale to me and most of his recent output sounds as though he just ran out of ideas...this coming from the guy who wrote Falling Down in 1993, a wonderful score that had various styles colliding at once. Still love that one!

Rant over...


----------



## Resoded

dcoscina @ 2nd December 2011 said:


> I'm sure I'm not the only one who is confounded or perhaps frustrated but the junk he hears that passes for orchestral music. You've got people posting these epic tunes on YouTube or even game scores that are just an affront to orchestral music. If a person wants to write in other forms like jazz or rock or reaggae or whatever, fine, then there isn't the imposed ideology because they don't necessitate it. But for crying out loud- do you think Adler, Piston, Rimsky Korsakov and Kenan wrote books just for the fun of it? And we're only talking about the arranging part of orchestral music. Let's not even get into the musicality.



Let me ask you this. What's the difference between your orchestral music and the affront of orchestral music? And why would this affront be acceptable using other instruments?

Also, this imposed ideology, why is it necessary?


----------



## David Story

Music actually does make progress. It's not all about the individual playing how they feel at the moment. Orchestral music has centuries of evolution in rhythm, melody, harmony and orchestration. You have to have that at your fingertips, or you're a wannabe. Or an amnesiac.

Poseur's Java/Sudanese tune is a great example of highly evolved orchestral music using non-western instruments. Gugum Gumbira gets that style of orchestral music and adapts it to pop. Love it.

I think Ned hit the fundamental truth behind David's observation: producers have deliberately dumbed down music for profit. Even Williams has to back off under the pressure of billions of dollars pushing our culture away from orchestral music with heart and mind."Don't think, follow orders."
(sample mockups are composers contribution to the race down)

Yet good work still makes it through, just less often. 

And melody is coming back. Are you ready?


----------



## rgames

dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> Technique is not there to analyze and be cool. It's a system that has evolved over centuries and refined by masters of music for a reason- because it strengthens the end product. I don't think I'd expect Tangerine Dream to employ 5th species counterpoint but I certainly love hearing a fugal setting of a tune on an Emerson Lake and Palmer disc.


Yes - the "technique" argument again.

When I see that I translate it as "if you're not as musically analytical as I am, you can't possibly appreciate music". To that I say this: have you ever heard of Beethoven, or Mozart, or Satie, or, or, or?

If you search through their works, you will see many that do not pass your requirement for "technique" or whatever you want to call it. Yet history has deemed them to be masterpieces. Beethoven's fifth symphony, in fact, opens with one of those incessant, pounding rhythms that is repeated over and over and over and over and over. And harmonic complexity? Not much there... Must be total crap, right?

Furthermore, history disagrees with your assesment (if I understand it correctly) that great ideas require complexity. The greatest ideas in every human endeavor (science, mathematics, music, whatever) are the simplest. So, in fact, we could argue that the people writing three-chord music with simplistic pounding rhythms are getting closer to greatness than the people who think about 5th species counterpoint.

Here's a fact you seem to be missing: the academic study of music is descriptive, not proscriptive. The laws of science are proscriptive: they predict what will happen in the future. The laws of music are descriptive: they simply state the rules that were in favor at a given time. Therefore, by following the laws of music (what I gather is what you mean by "technique"), you are, by definition, re-creating different versions of what has already been created.

Is that really any different than writing trailer music? Fundamentally, no: you're just using a different set of rules. So if you want to have the "my rules are better than yours" argument, well, go right ahead. I think it's a waste of time.

You can't constrain music under the requirement for "technique". It won't let you. That's the great thing about it: it defies logical explanation.

rgames


----------



## Resoded

rgames @ 2nd December 2011 said:


> dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Technique is not there to analyze and be cool. It's a system that has evolved over centuries and refined by masters of music for a reason- because it strengthens the end product. I don't think I'd expect Tangerine Dream to employ 5th species counterpoint but I certainly love hearing a fugal setting of a tune on an Emerson Lake and Palmer disc.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes - the "technique" argument again.
> 
> When I see that I translate it as "if you're not as musically analytical as I am, you can't possibly appreciate music". To that I say this: have you ever heard of Beethoven, or Mozart, or Satie, or, or, or?
> 
> If you search through their works, you will see many that do not pass your requirement for "technique" or whatever you want to call it. Yet history has deemed them to be masterpieces. Beethoven's fifth symphony, in fact, opens with one of those incessant, pounding rhythms that is repeated over and over and over and over and over. And harmonic complexity? Not much there... Must be total crap, right?
> 
> Furthermore, history disagrees with your assesment (if I understand it correctly) that great ideas require complexity. The greatest ideas in every human endeavor (science, mathematics, music, whatever) are the simplest. So, in fact, we could argue that the people writing three-chord music with simplistic pounding rhythms are getting closer to greatness than the people who think about 5th species counterpoint.
> 
> Here's a fact you seem to be missing: the academic study of music is descriptive, not proscriptive. The laws of science are proscriptive: they predict what will happen in the future. The laws of music are descriptive: they simply state the rules that were in favor at a given time. Therefore, by following the laws of music (what I gather is what you mean by "technique"), you are, by definition, re-creating different versions of what has already been created.
> 
> Is that really any different than writing trailer music? Fundamentally, no: you're just using a different set of rules. So if you want to have the "my rules are better than yours" argument, well, go right ahead. I think it's a waste of time.
> 
> You can't constrain music under the requirement for "technique". It won't let you. That's the great thing about it: it defies logical explanation.
> 
> rgames
Click to expand...


Such a great post, well said.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

Very nicely put, Richard.


----------



## poseur

for some years,
i've been bringing every bit of inspiration, musicality & technique that i can muster
to every one of my scores.....
as i attempt to do with every other music with which i'm involved.

not everyone's gonna like it;
many won't know it's there, and of those who do,
many composers won't necessarily deign to be generously respectful.

but, it is what it is;
we do what we can do, here.

beyond that, to the subject at hand?
there's nothing i can do to change others' approaches, nor do i desire to do so.

does that mean that i love everything, in every score i hear?
no.
i do not love these mysterious, clearly subtle pseudo-"individualities" prevalent in scoring, today;
when composition, itself, becomes a re-serialised collection of tropes _of any stylised kind_,
surely something's amiss.....
though it must describe, somehow,
someone's needs for an ever more rigid & shorter short-list of filmic convention & conveniences.

what can i do about that?
nothing.
keeping in my mind what the director & producers are saying,
i'll write what i'm inspired to write, what i feel that the film needs.....
& have found that i detest any single note or trope i'd written without really feeling it,
without any actual, internal commitment:
not an intellectual thing, that, though intellect is not discounted..... by me.

oh, well.
rambling.
back to the score-at-hand.


----------



## handz

Jeffrey Peterson @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> They can't write a tune or harmonize so they fill up the cue with a bunch of sound effects, soundscapes/atmosperes, and drums, drums, drums.
> 
> Music is becoming dumb ed down by the year and I can't imagine how its going to in 20 years. Hundreds of thousands of young adults "composing" for film with not a shred of training or study of REAL music.




You are totally right, unfortunately even here people diagree. 

"They can't write a tune or harmonize so they fill up the cue with a bunch of sound effects, soundscapes/atmosperes, and drums, drums, drums."

This line is a fact and no it in 99% not sound good, it just sound and maybe works in movie but I said it many times - in movies almost everything works, that is not a rule of good music. 

atmospheres, drums and soundscapes can be a good music but usually it is onyl wannabe interesting piece of crap these days.


----------



## rJames

dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> I'm sure I'm not the only one who is confounded or perhaps frustrated but the junk he hears that passes for orchestral music. You've got people posting these epic tunes on YouTube or even game scores that are just an affront to orchestral music. If a person wants to write in other forms like jazz or rock or reaggae or whatever, fine, then there isn't the imposed ideology because they don't necessitate it. But for crying out loud- do you think Adler, Piston, Rimsky Korsakov and Kenan wrote books just for the fun of it? And we're only talking about the arranging part of orchestral music. Let's not even get into the musicality.
> 
> Anyone who asks me what's the best way to learn orchestration I say 2 things- go to the library, take out a conductor's score, and listen to the music whilst looking over what's happening. Also, LIVE PERFORMANCES. Recordings are fine and dandy but they don't translate exactly what happens in a live hall setting. Even if a person never wants to write for concert hall, it's imperative that they know how to balance instruments and such.
> 
> Again, I don't impose this credo onto all styles of music and I love listening to a lot of different things. I'm just disillusioned with orchestral writing largely for film these days. It seems incompetent and in LA you don't even know who wrote what. Sometimes the orchestrators are doing most of the work.
> 
> I recall a story about Herrmann giving Goldsmith a hard time for using orchestrators, though on another occasion he charged onto the stage during a recording session and told Jerry that that particular cue was too good for the movie it accompanied and for him to keep it for himself. God love Benny.



The orchestra has barely (10 or 20 years) been discovered by 99% of the world's musicians. We'd all heard it but didn't have access!!

Remember when the guitar was discovered by pop musicians in the 50s? You could analyze history and say that the guitar could only play songs that used I, IV, and V chords (I guess some songs were I, vi, ii, V; but you get my meaning)

Rock progressed to Rush, Yes, Dream Theater, Jeff Beck etc.

I wouldn't put too much time in worrying about what passes for orchestral music these days. In a few years, you won't recognize it at all.

Regarding your original post. If you can't or don't want to make a living in music, more power to you. Life should be about seeking happiness, not being burdened.

But you could write one for the project then one for yourself. Use your musical wiles to put a touch of yourself into each cue you write even when it is for a project that demands a sound alike. Decide that YOU will be the one to take music back where it should be. Its up to you.


----------



## lux

What comes in mind is that most of scores which are mentioned here as a princes of a" lost golden age" (see Williams best period late seventies early eighties) flourished in a period where half scores were performed on funny looking synthetizers from Oberheim, Moog, Korg, Yamaha and the like. And many of them sounded like '80 pop songs.

...and they were in a good fraction pretty cool nonetheless.

Speaking of our years as the most apocalyptic of all times looks like its the game of the new century.


----------



## KEnK

No one has said this yet and it surprises me.

The root of the problem is the tools.
It's the DAWs and the Sample Sets that anyone w/ a computer has access to.
(Note that I didn't say "buy")

The one Trailer Piece that is reworked for 19 out of 20 Trailers,
and all the other "film music" that sounds like that is nothing more than
a Techno or Hip Hop variation.

There is no harmonic, melodic, or thematic development in those styles either.
Just loops and samples.

Does anybody think this conversation would take place if the only tool available was pencil and paper?

The Computer is the Undoing of the Art.
It's also the Great "Democratizer".

That means "Anybody" can, and "Anybody" will.

Craft is History.
A Relic of the Pre-Computer Age.
Everything is Equal now.

Crap, Made in China 

my 2¢ :D 
Ken


----------



## sevaels

Love it or hate it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UA1aTaa ... _embedded#!

On the flip side:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcNqzpyK ... ure=relmfu


o[])


----------



## noiseboyuk

handz @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> in movies almost everything works



Boy, do I ever disagree with THAT. Maybe my definition of "works" is different....


----------



## Resoded

KEnK @ 2nd December 2011 said:


> No one has said this yet and it surprises me.
> 
> The root of the problem is the tools.
> It's the DAWs and the Sample Sets that anyone w/ a computer has access to.
> (Note that I didn't say "buy")
> 
> The one Trailer Piece that is reworked for 19 out of 20 Trailers,
> and all the other "film music" that sounds like that is nothing more than
> a Techno or Hip Hop variation.
> 
> There is no harmonic, melodic, or thematic development in those styles either.
> Just loops and samples.
> 
> Does anybody think this conversation would take place if the only tool available was pencil and paper?
> 
> The Computer is the Undoing of the Art.
> It's also the Great "Democratizer".
> 
> That means "Anybody" can, and "Anybody" will.
> 
> Craft is History.
> A Relic of the Pre-Computer Age.
> Everything is Equal now.
> 
> Crap, Made in China
> 
> my 2¢ :D
> Ken



This is like saying anyone can be a ballet dancer just because they have a body, the outfit and the shoes.

Creating something with quality however, that takes skill and talent, and skill/talent is NOT something everyone has.

Sure, samples gives the sound quality for free, but that's about it.


----------



## gsilbers

EastWest Lurker @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> One again, I read the same vapid arguments that there are no empirical standards to judge music by, it's all only taste and opinion. It's baloney, it's anti-intellectual, and it leads to the preponderance of BANG! BOOM! WHOOSH! type stuff we hear over and over now.
> 
> If it has to be explained to someone why it isn't artistically commensurate with the hard-earned craftsmanship of a Williams, Goldsmith, Powell, Newman, Stevie Wonder, Paul Simon, Bill Evans, Ornette Coleman, John Adams etc. then that person is always going to swim in that sad little pond.




i agree with the 1st sentence. (except with bang boom bam part) 


its actually the ONLY sentence in this whole thread that really makes sense and i think its the MAIN issue. 

Dissecting jay 1st sentence will yield a better thread, argument and thought process. 

if not its like being children in a sandbox saying "my superhero is better than yours" o[]) 0oD


----------



## Resoded

gsilbers @ 2nd December 2011 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> One again, I read the same vapid arguments that there are no empirical standards to judge music by, it's all only taste and opinion. It's baloney, it's anti-intellectual, and it leads to the preponderance of BANG! BOOM! WHOOSH! type stuff we hear over and over now.
> 
> If it has to be explained to someone why it isn't artistically commensurate with the hard-earned craftsmanship of a Williams, Goldsmith, Powell, Newman, Stevie Wonder, Paul Simon, Bill Evans, Ornette Coleman, John Adams etc. then that person is always going to swim in that sad little pond.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i agree with the 1st sentence. (except with bang boom bam part)
> 
> 
> its actually the ONLY sentence in this whole thread that really makes sense and i think its the MAIN issue.
> 
> Dissecting jay 1st sentence will yield a better thread, argument and thought process.
> 
> if not its like being children in a sandbox saying "my superhero is better than yours" o[]) 0oD
Click to expand...


There is no empirical way of measuring the _quality_ of music. Why? Because there are 7 billion definitions of quality. There are 7 billion definitions of music. There are 7 billion people reacting differently to the music, differences in age, experience, time of day, context, life events etc.

It's down right silly of EW Lurker to mention "anti-intellectual" in the same sentence as his best argument for his thesis is "baloney". It would be interesting however if those of you claiming there is an empirical measurement of the quality of music to present your arguments. This would stimulate a constructive and interesting turn to this thread.

My best guess on measuring music empirically would be mathematically. However, even if you did, there will be several formulas which works and who is to decide which formula is better than the other? 

There will always be someone preferring the wacky clown horn over the french horn. And it all boils down to, why is that persons opinion lesser than yours?

edit: Re-reading the post missing out on the last part. Sure craftsmanship, yeah, that's closer to a solid argument. But what is the point? Is one artists craftsmanship better than the others? Because then we have that word again, better, which is and will always be an opinion when talking music. So again, what's the point? More advanced? Yeah sure, that's an even better argument. "Craftsmanship can be judged by it's complexity". But what's the point with measuring complexity and how is that relevant here?


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

Resoded you are exactly the sterotype we are talking about. So of course you will be offended of the truth. Your in your early twenties, with no education or study, and your one track is exactly what we are talking about. Maybe only people who have actually made money with music should be allowed to post on this topic that is going over most of your heads.


----------



## KEnK

Resoded @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> There is no empirical way of measuring the _quality_ of music...
> 
> ...Sure craftsmanship, yeah, that's closer to a solid argument. But what is the point? Is one artists craftsmanship better than the others? Because then we have that word again, better, which is and will always be an opinion when talking music. So again, what's the point? More advanced? Yeah sure, that's an even better argument. "Craftsmanship can be judged by it's complexity". But what's the point with measuring complexity and how is that relevant here?


So-
I don't play trumpet today.
If I buy one tomorrow, then next week I'll be as good as Miles Davis, right?

If you answer no, then you don't buy your own argument.

All Art is not Equal.

Ken


----------



## dcoscina

I think the subject heading is more than clear on this. It's a subjective observation and not an indictment. Those usual suspects who chimed in with the ubiquitous retorts (you guys should just copy-paste from other posts) were jumping on the defensive band wagon. 

I don't think I've ever said I'm the pinnacle of music knowledge. I want to learn more and be inspired to write music. But frankly, I don't hear a lot that inspires me. And that's my goddamned right as much as it's yours to articulate your disdain for my opinions on this forum. It's a two way road gentlemen. 

But if I may- to those dissidents- if you're tired of the "same old argument" why don't you just pass over this thread rather than complain about it? Does it make you feel empowered to try to knock a person who clearly is couching their observations as subjective personal opinion? Seems like it in some posts. If I clearly don't know what I'm talking about, or my music sucks, why are my half baked opinions so threatening to some of you? Really...

Thanks Nikolas, Dave, Mike V and others who understood the tenor of my post. I will check out more avenues...


----------



## dcoscina

One other thing- if there is no empiricism towards measuring music, why do we have so many institutions that teach it as such? Someone should call Juilliard and Berklee and tell them to close shop since clearly art is subjective and all wonderful. This argument reminds me of the biggest bullshit movement in history- conceptual art.


----------



## noiseboyuk

(post not directed at the OP)

Ed's right. We have been here many times before, it never ends, no-one ever has anything to say to actually back up the ascertation that there is some objective yardstick to judge music.

I think this rather bizarre position to take - there there is some empirical truth to be discovered - might be unique to composers among all artists actually. I'm a film nut. I love spirited debates about writers and directors. But I don't think I know anyone who is foolish enough to say Wells / Lean / Spielberg / Wilder / Hitchcock / Godard / Whoever is The Greatest Director. It's pointless and meaningless, and it falls at exactly this point - there's no objective standard to base it on, just opinions.

I think some people have a problem with that cos when they read it they throw their hands in the air and say "so you're saying that Sex In The City 2 is as good as The Seven Samurai?" And that's what I don't get... cos actually filmmakers and film fans DON'T say that. They have intelligent, reasoned, passionate debate about the whole subject, without some bizarre need to turn it into an exact science. Art is art, attempts to treat as science are misguided - and no, that's doesn't mean that study and skill of the craft isn't invaluable. 

But yes, we've frequently been here before. I thank Danny for quoting some great recent scores, I celebrate all great music in all its glorious diversity and reject the dross. And as a yardstick to gauge which is which, I'll use my extremely subjective ears.

I thank you.


----------



## Freds

It's hard to evaluate what is *good music* or good art, for that matter. 

There's always the matter of taste and this seem to be used by everybody to justify crappy creations everywhere. 

So, who is right? what is "good music"? My best answer would be: *what transcends the test of time*:

When we look to the past we tend to remember and preserve the best pieces of arts and music is not an exception. People keep studying classics for a reason. People keep respecting Beetles for a reason. 
There's always the argument of "history remember the winners", so obviously artists that manage to be listened by more people have a better chance to be remembered, but among those we tend to remember the better ones. 

In other words, I do think is possible to judge music or art, but it's hard to do by only a person or even a group of people since each individual personal background (or their society background) will influenced their answers. 

There are some clues, though, as what is gonna be considered good music and I think that best musicians, the more experienced listeners or the most creative people have a better insight to this and tend to have a better "taste" than others. But again, this is not enough. 

Taking all this in consideration and going to specifics examples it's hard not to consider someone like Williams a master of this craft.
Also, composers following the "placing a percussion bed over common chords" approach should think about all this too and see how this music fits in all this.

Because of all i said before I don't want to criticize this music too much, but in my case, I find doing this style of composition particularly easy. If I'm in a tight deadline this is what I might do myself. If I have time I rather put more effort and do something that I consider more special (more interesting harmonies, better melodies, well thought sound design, or whatever I'm in the mood for or the jobs requires).

In other words, I believe any good composer with a descent knowledge of technology (most people these days) can learn how to do this music very quickly, but it takes time and work to learn how to do strong melodies, interesting harmonies, good orchestration and textures, or interesting sound design (depending on the style of music).

Does this means their music is better? I don't know, but I think is something to be considered when music is your life and profession.


----------



## Lex

As far Dcoscina's "troubles", why not just listen what you like? I mean who is forcing you to listen to scores and music in general that doesn't inspire you? 

One thing, could any of you that talk about SWOOSH BANG film scores point me to an actual score of this kind? Unless you have Transformers3 and Pirates4 on repeat, I don't know what scores you are referring to?

I tried to go trough to past year and fail to remember any other?

Green Lantern - while bland and uninspired it was effective and hardly a swoosh bang score?

Captain America - Silvestri on autopilot, nothing new, missed chance but does the job ok and again not really swoosh bang in sight?

Source Code - good score, not a swoosh or bang in sight.

Priest - same story

Thor - god awful , but not really swoosh bang?

List goes on....I picked these cause they were some of the shallowest blockbusters of
the year so I would suspect they would be the scores you guys are referring to. 

If not, Jay, Dcoscina and the rest of the "E.T. or die" fan club , could you please point out the scores you are talking about, otherwise these discussions are hard to understand. 

alex


----------



## Resoded

Jeffrey Peterson @ 2nd December 2011 said:


> Resoded you are exactly the sterotype we are talking about. So of course you will be offended of the truth. Your in your early twenties, with no education or study, and your one track is exactly what we are talking about. Maybe only people who have actually made money with music should be allowed to post on this topic that is going over most of your heads.



I see. You choose the classic argumentation error/tactic to face the person and not the arguments. This is too bad since I have a sincere interest to hear more about your opinions to further consider the fact that you guys might have a good point. I'm not arguing to change you, because I don't believe I can, I'm arguing to make you guys present your arguments.

Considering where you went with your post then I presume this to be a lost cause. There are so many things I could say about your post but I choose not to.


----------



## Guy Bacos

Unfortunately we have no control over our destiny, some people write shit and make lots of money, I had a friend I worked with on a movie, and he was loaded, his wall was covered with gold records, mostly from Germany, and said to me, "this stuff is shit, but it sells". The guy took a direction right from the start to make money. He did it wisely and won his bet. I'd say Dave, hang in there, feed off from music that inspires you and what ever happens, happens. Many of the clichés styles we hear today will be ridiculed in a few years, they have no depth, so don't let yourself be impressed by what's "in". Personally, I never cared about what's "in" and always did what I enjoyed writing, and even though some people may hate what I do, it never stopped me from doing it and developing my own craft. Just keep writing and look for the right inspiration for you.


----------



## Ed

noiseboyuk @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> (post not directed at the OP)
> 
> Ed's right. We have been here many times before, it never ends, no-one ever has anything to say to actually back up the ascertation that there is some objective yardstick to judge music.



Which I always thought was funny because I already pointed out at least one way to objectively judge music, I actually think theres several more as well. I find it strange how I can come up with ways to do so but can never get the "otherside" to even give me one and argue with it, but there we go. 



> I think this rather bizarre position to take - there there is some empirical truth to be discovered - might be unique to composers among all artists actually. I'm a film nut. I love spirited debates about writers and directors. But I don't think I know anyone who is foolish enough to say Wells / Lean / Spielberg / Wilder / Hitchcock / Godard / Whoever is The Greatest Director. It's pointless and meaningless, and it falls at exactly this point - there's no objective standard to base it on, just opinions.
> 
> *I think some people have a problem with that cos when they read it they throw their hands in the air and say "so you're saying that Sex In The City 2 is as good as The Seven Samurai?" And that's what I don't get... cos actually filmmakers and film fans DON'T say that. *They have intelligent, reasoned, passionate debate about the whole subject, without some bizarre need to turn it into an exact science. Art is art, attempts to treat as science are misguided - and no, that's doesn't mean that study and skill of the craft isn't invaluable.



Great point there Guy.

I sometimes get the feeling that some rather less open minded people (musically) see music like a ladder of hierarchy ranging from terrible music to great music. In reality, people who like Beethoven and The Beatles usually do so for *very different reasons. * I would guess that while the "otherside" might be coaxed into agreeing with this, probably just argue that the reasons for liking the Beatles just isn't as valid.


----------



## poseur

dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> One other thing- if there is no empiricism towards measuring music, why do we have so many institutions that teach it as such? Someone should call Juilliard and Berklee and tell them to close shop since clearly art is subjective and all wonderful.



the flow of logic, there, shows a bit of the leg of a straw-man, i think;
witness, that all successfully matriculating students-of-craft are not "great" musicians nor composers.
there's no democracy, in that..... ever.
there's only time, and what time & experience might say about our music's ability
to transform human feeling into something..... deeper, further, maybe even more revealing.

hey, yeah!
you can measure music by the skill of its craft, if you want to do so;
but, you will not, therein, be measuring its humane value, nor the qualities of either its purpose(s) & effect(s):
it's music, for chrissakes!
not idiom. not style. rules-of-spirit-and-imagination can be applied here, too!
that's kinda the idea, right?
seems apparent, to me.
so my earliest composer-teacher told me.

of course,
some pedagogues tend (&, have tended) to encourage both learning _&_ throwing some creative cautions to the winds,
in regards to both composition & performance.....
a few of my mentors certainly did, in any case,
each of them artists-of-note, certainly, and broad-bandwidth, open-eared listeners, all. 
open-eared!

the thrust, there, wasn't to instigate (willy-nilly) the throwing-out-of-the-baby-with-the-bathwater, 
nor somehow actually dispensing with continuous education; no way.
in a nutshell, these were in the range of the musical focii:
intentionality, commitment, continuing & broadening self-educability,
musical self-analysis & something a bit less defined & more ephemeral,
via these other elements: soul, or heart or whatever.

always, too, was this overarching, or underlying (and, still, completely ephemeral) thing:
the commitment must, somehow, be to one's own voice..... the path towards a recognisable voice,
albeit not simply for the sake of "possessing" it.

they don't quite teach these things directly, broadly, in academia, of course.....
we're most interested in teaching mechanics, and whatever _today's version_ of the history of mechanics may seem to be.
though, doesn't matter:
some students will get it, anyways, via their own motivation, for better or worse.

but, these aren't exactly standards by which hollywood is _generally_ capable of judging music-for-its-own-uses, 
really.....
nor, are they even standards that every musician & composer seems to care to consider.
imo.



dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> This argument reminds me of the biggest [email protected]#t movement in history- conceptual art.




not _all_ "conceptual art" was (or, is) bullshit, dc;
of course it is not.
the basis of eurocentric "classical" music is, itself, conceptual..... since the tempering of its instruments began.
afaict.

and: 
sure, some empiricism, vis à vis "kinds" of music might be applicable, 
at least (as you point out) towards the craft.....
but it is silly for anyone to judge the feelings that music does (or does not) engender
by the appearance of skills in the application of "correctness" of craft, alone,
whether that craft be rooted in euro-classical, jazz, south indian, rock, reggae, touareg or whatever music.....
¿no?

me, i'm only attracted to paying attention to the beauties, eccentricities & uglinesses of craft
when the music is either truly moving me, or is moving my bowels, instead;
i find that if i'm hearing the craft over being fully engaged,
or am not at some point become absorbed in the music, then..... well.
ok.

i'm 58yrs old.
i'm a relatively educated man, broadly & musically speaking,
and..... errrmmm..... have been a working professional composer, recording dude, musician & occasional musical-technologist for some 40+ yrs.
music is my life, as it were.
i'm not a child, i don't feel entitled, i'm not speaking from my internet armchair, alone.
i'm definitely not so bitter as to be either ruined or ruinous,
not steadily angry at the world for knowing that it will not bow to my questionable will.

and, anyways:
it's all pissing in the wind; no problems are resolved, here.

i have found, though, that some musical (& extra-musical) problems
might become resolved in the way that one chooses to perceive things, 
and chooses to do things.....
like, making music.
or, making it..... and, teaching it.

but, again, i suspect i've said pretty much nothing, here,
and just went off on another phreaking lark.

i still love the mansurian string quartets, fwiw.
and ty braxton.
and julius hemphill.
and sigur ros.
and arvo pärt.
and opeth.
and steve reich.
and david bowie.
and imaran.
and my brightest diamond.
and gillian welch.
and giya kancheli.
and paul hindemith.
and david borden.
and eleni karaindrou.
and kim kashkashian, who, in playing 4 simple notes, recently, caused me to cry like a baby idiot.
etc.
etc.
etc.


----------



## gsilbers

Freds @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> It's hard to evaluate what is *good music* or good art, for that matter.
> 
> There's always the matter of taste and this seem to be used by everybody to justify crappy creations everywhere.
> 
> So, who is right? what is "good music"? My best answer would be: *what transcends the test of time*:
> 
> When we look to the past we tend to remember and preserve the best pieces of arts and music is not an exception. People keep studying classics for a reason. People keep respecting Beetles for a reason.
> There's always the argument of "history remember the winners", so obviously artists that manage to be listened by more people have a better chance to be remembered, but among those we tend to remember the better ones.
> 
> In other words, I do think is possible to judge music or art, but it's hard to do by only a person or even a group of people since each individual personal background (or their society background) will influenced their answers.
> 
> There are some clues, though, as what is gonna be considered good music and I think that best musicians, the more experienced listeners or the most creative people have a better insight to this and tend to have a better "taste" than others. But again, this is not enough.
> 
> Taking all this in consideration and going to specifics examples it's hard not to consider someone like Williams a master of this craft.
> Also, composers following the "placing a percussion bed over common chords" approach should think about all this too and see how this music fits in all this.
> 
> Because of all i said before I don't want to criticize this music too much, but in my case, I find doing this style of composition particularly easy. If I'm in a tight deadline this is what I might do myself. If I have time I rather put more effort and do something that I consider more special (more interesting harmonies, better melodies, well thought sound design, or whatever I'm in the mood for or the jobs requires).
> 
> In other words, I believe any good composer with a descent knowledge of technology (most people these days) can learn how to do this music very quickly, but it takes time and work to learn how to do strong melodies, interesting harmonies, good orchestration and textures, or interesting sound design (depending on the style of music).
> 
> Those this means their music is better? I don't know, but I think is something to be considered when music is your life and profession.




wwwoow!! 

look who showed up! 

did they kick u out of the motu forum? hehehe

or are u done w your film/doc? 

oh, and +1 on what u wrote.


----------



## José Herring

dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> One other thing- if there is no empiricism towards measuring music, why do we have so many institutions that teach it as such? Someone should call Juilliard and Berklee and tell them to close shop since clearly art is subjective and all wonderful.



Empirical standards, in a field that's entirely subjective, is not empirical at all. The only thing that is really empirical in music is the overtone series and its relationship to scales and harmony. The rest is entirely opinion. So who is to say, who's opinion is more valid? If, for example, you're a circle of 5ths composer and never venture off into more adventurous territory, if in the circle of 5ths, you can get your message across, then why would that be any less valid than a composer who prefers extended harmonic languages and can properly voice a flat-13 chord(if there is even a way to properly voice it)?

If upon further investigation you discover that the "rules" of orchestration were derived of use of an orchestra on a concert stage, then would it be logical that those rules be re-evaluated, in an era when the chief medium is the recording studio? And, if there was an empirical standard, would not, new investigation reveal other standards that should be taken into consideration in a new age.

Personally, I've always had a soft spot for the music of dcosina. Because I know where he's coming from. But, at the same time not to recognize that there are others who may have a different standard is a bit limited in thinking.

Not saying that what's happening today couldn't be done better. Personally I think it can. But, to think that all that's happening is big drum shit is a mistake. But even if it was. Is not percussion, a section in the orchestra? And, that being said, could not some brilliant music be composed and orchestrated for big drums?


----------



## Freds

gsilbers @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> Freds @ Fri Dec 02 said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's hard to evaluate what is *good music* or good art, for that matter.
> 
> There's always the matter of taste and this seem to be used by everybody to justify crappy creations everywhere.
> 
> So, who is right? what is "good music"? My best answer would be: *what transcends the test of time*:
> 
> When we look to the past we tend to remember and preserve the best pieces of arts and music is not an exception. People keep studying classics for a reason. People keep respecting Beetles for a reason.
> There's always the argument of "history remember the winners", so obviously artists that manage to be listened by more people have a better chance to be remembered, but among those we tend to remember the better ones.
> 
> In other words, I do think is possible to judge music or art, but it's hard to do by only a person or even a group of people since each individual personal background (or their society background) will influenced their answers.
> 
> There are some clues, though, as what is gonna be considered good music and I think that best musicians, the more experienced listeners or the most creative people have a better insight to this and tend to have a better "taste" than others. But again, this is not enough.
> 
> Taking all this in consideration and going to specifics examples it's hard not to consider someone like Williams a master of this craft.
> Also, composers following the "placing a percussion bed over common chords" approach should think about all this too and see how this music fits in all this.
> 
> Because of all i said before I don't want to criticize this music too much, but in my case, I find doing this style of composition particularly easy. If I'm in a tight deadline this is what I might do myself. If I have time I rather put more effort and do something that I consider more special (more interesting harmonies, better melodies, well thought sound design, or whatever I'm in the mood for or the jobs requires).
> 
> In other words, I believe any good composer with a descent knowledge of technology (most people these days) can learn how to do this music very quickly, but it takes time and work to learn how to do strong melodies, interesting harmonies, good orchestration and textures, or interesting sound design (depending on the style of music).
> 
> Does this means their music is better? I don't know, but I think is something to be considered when music is your life and profession.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> wwwoow!!
> 
> look who showed up!
> 
> did they kick u out of the motu forum? hehehe
> 
> or are u done w your film/doc?
> 
> oh, and +1 on what u wrote.
Click to expand...


Hahaha, they haven't kicked me yet...

Not done with the films yet, but writing on forums is one of my favorite forms of procrastination! :D


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

Resoded I apologize for taking a personal jab at your music. Its actually a good track. Your right, its about the argument. However I have stated my argument very clearly IMHO and you can refer back to it if need be. But as I was saying using you as an example was wrong and I apologize.


----------



## dcoscina

Let me distill things a lot simpler. I acknowledge what is popular today. I acknowledge the style and process and tools of the trade that are required to deliver a product that makes $$$. I acknowledge all this and I acknowledge that I'm obviously behind the times because something that I feel very passionate about-namely music- rarely does what it used to do for me which is move me, regardless of the technique or chops applied. I acknowledge that listening to older music, even stuff I've just discovered, like some Herrmann score I'd never heard before (and thus is "new" to me) does resonate with me emotionally.

So, basically, it's my fucking problem and I'm lamenting that. 

How's that? Simple enough to digest guys? 

Now I'm going back to listening to some Bill Evans to help me flesh out a jazz x-mas tune I've been working on literally for years...


----------



## poseur

dcoscina @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> Let me distill things a lot simpler. I acknowledge what is popular today. I acknowledge the style and process and tools of the trade that are required to deliver a product that makes $$$. I acknowledge all this and I acknowledge that I'm obviously behind the times because something that I feel very passionate about-namely music- rarely does what it used to do for me which is move me, regardless of the technique or chops applied. I acknowledge that listening to older music, even stuff I've just discovered, like some Herrmann score I'd never heard before (and thus is "new" to me) does resonate with me emotionally.
> 
> So, basically, it's my [email protected]#king problem and I'm lamenting that.
> 
> How's that? Simple enough to digest guys?
> 
> Now I'm going back to listening to some Bill Evans to help me flesh out a jazz x-mas tune I've been working on literally for years...



sorry, david.
ok.

on a pleasant, post-bill evans listening note:
have you listened much to "the bad plus" (from their more serious material)?
or, nik bärtsch & "ronin"?
or, benoit delbecq?
or --- lord have mercy --- craig taborn?


----------



## David Story

David, you're one of many people undeserved by today's entertainment industry. You have to hunt to find music that's inspired and crafted to your standards. That's not your problem. That's the entertainment industry's problem. 

And at least you're doing something about it


----------



## Resoded

Jeffrey Peterson @ 3rd December 2011 said:


> Resoded I apologize for taking a personal jab at your music.



Thank you for the apology Jeffrey.



Jeffrey Peterson @ 3rd December 2011 said:


> Its actually a good track.



Hehe, yeah right.



Jeffrey Peterson @ 3rd December 2011 said:


> Your right, its about the argument. However I have stated my argument very clearly IMHO and you can refer back to it if need be. But as I was saying using you as an example was wrong and I apologize.



I backtracked and found your posts and I will keep them in mind.

Thinking back on everything I've written I realize that this is probably an emotional topic. In the sense that the core idea of the thread is based on a gut feeling of disliking some forms of music, and trying to push people for arguments about their feelings is just silly.

Since I grew up with metal, I for example hated hip hop and techno and saw it as lesser music by lesser people. I've changed though and have accepted a more humble approach by looking at it realistically. Some people love these genres and there's a reason for it, and I doubt that reason to be stupidity.


----------



## mverta

_Mike
Big version


----------



## noiseboyuk

mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> _Mike
> Big version



OK, that is funny...


----------



## Kralc

Maybe if his songs didn't have a ton of lyrics, he'd focus more on melody. Lil Wayne is a rapper, rap focuses more on lyrical content than melodic. Jazz and Rap just aren't the same genre. 

Although listening to "A Milli", I'm trying very hard not to burn my ears off.


----------



## lux

jazz vs hip hop, ravel vs lady gaga..this is getting a bit old farts discussion isnt it? :D


----------



## Marko Zirkovich

A classic scene for this discussion:


----------



## Ed

josejherring @ Fri Dec 02 said:


> Is not percussion, a section in the orchestra? And, that being said, could not some brilliant music be composed and orchestrated for big drums?



LIKE THIS

AND THIS /\~O


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

There are likely thousands of contemporary music pieces for percussion only. That said, I have to admit that often, .... Zzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## dcoscina

Octandre by Varese is all percussion. Not the easiest piece to get through mind you....


----------



## Guy Bacos

mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> _Mike
> Big version



Hehe, I like that. How about orchestral music evolution?


----------



## dcoscina

Here's a good example of a composer largely known for everything other than strong melodies- but he still kicked ass. Listen to the dynamism of this track how he shifts between timbral elements to keep things exciting. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q7vZSgPlL0

And here is the main theme

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3zgRnTJ ... re=related

It's amazing what Herrmann could do with the same instrumentation as Bartok but to come up with a completely different sound.

Here's the Finale-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPeT4P5h ... bmdroFiMhK

To me, this is one of the most emotive cues Herrmann ever wrote. It perfectly balances beauty with a sense of pathos. Probably as close as anyone has gotten to Mahler without actually ripping him off. Love the harmonies here. Herrmann's vocabulary was just amazing. This kind of stuff makes my ears so happy. It's inspiring.


----------



## Guy Bacos

dcoscina @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Here's a good example of a composer largely known for everything other than strong melodies- but he still kicked ass. Listen to the dynamism of this track how he shifts between timbral elements to keep things exciting.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q7vZSgPlL0



Sorry, but even though those aren't leading melodies, this stuff is very melodic.


----------



## dcoscina

Yeah, I guess you'r right Guy. Check out the last example. The Finale is just so beautiful. I'm not sure we will ever see another Herrmann. I do admit it's hard to be unique these days, especially in the field of film or television. I think doing some interesting fusion of styles is probably the way to go and even then, it's a hard go. I've been trying to marry reggae with orchestral sensibilities but use jazz harmonies as the basis. At my core, I'm a jazzer so rich harmony always makes me take notice. Probably why I don't care much for the Classical period in Western music. It's weird because I really dig Bach who of course pre-dated Mozart, Haydn etc.. What a fantastic mind and some of his modulations were stunning even though he was working in supposedly much more rigid harmonic rules....


----------



## Ed

Seems kind of relevant.... if you think some people that don't deserve money and fame for the work they do


----------



## Guy Bacos

Speaking of Art and ART, here's a few thoughts of the late Andy Rooney:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsfX6xqCBks


----------



## givemenoughrope

I just viewed the movie Se7en again for the first time in a while (not as good as I remembered but whatever). On the special edition DVD there are commentaries with the director, cast, crew, composer and sound designer( the SD/foley on this was great, complimentary and musical in its own right). Whatever you think of Howard Shore, this is a fairly unique score for being made in the 90s: plenty of atonal yet melodic cues, not much resolution, not overly mickey moused action scenes, etc. it feels equally exotic as it does grim. It's hard to believe HS and Fincher ever had a conversation about anything much past the emotional core of scenes, start and stop times. In the meantime, he sort of 'got away with' writing some interesting music which when you hear it on its own is still interesting and enjoyable, still his voice and still very much and only Se7en IMO.

Maybe that is the solution, just being a musical bandit and getting away with it? It happens even in the current days of BOom/Bang, just not so much on the bigger films.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

Herrmann has such a unique voice. So did Goldsmith, and so do Newman, Zimmer, etc. It's easy to forget when they have been copied so often. Personally, I place more value on the originality and boldness of the writing than in the style (melodic VS rhythm, for eg), as there will always be great composers in any given genre of the day. There are masterpieces being written right now for those willing to sift through the mud.


----------



## dcoscina

Ned I do agree with your post. And as you and others will note, I've got a new perspective on Hans Z. I do think he's made a valid contribution to music and he himself seems to be pushing the envelop of what he can do- and I will always respect that. 

I know this thread went back to the same tired old arguments some of us have spun time and time again. It's my fault for not articulating things better. I guess I was looking to see if anyone else goes through these spells where a lot of music they hear just kind of falls flat for them. Obviously older stuff has a built in sentimental attachment and as such will always be superior to new stuff because it's not just the music- there are broader associations. 

I'm not really concerned with what is happening as far as trends are concerned. To be completely self centered, I'm more concerned about how I can once again find inspiration. Honestly, the two recent Williams' scores, while certainly great to be out there, aren't as affecting to me as his earlier work. So really, it's about how I'm perceiving music and what I want out of it. I was posting this to see if anyone else was feeling the same way. I actually didn't mean to start the old new vs old, art vs commerce, training vs untrained debates because they can go on and on because clearly everyone has different opinions and perspectives on these topics...

I just got Kontakt 5 and received a free copy of Retro Machines so I've been going through them. Because I began composing in the '80s, when I bring up a sound from then, I immediately think of '80s idiomatic playing. My challenge today is make a piece of music using these sounds but say , in a Herrmann framework. Can I do it? The fun is in the trying....


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

I love the idea of you trying to 'transpose' your writing to synths! There's a lot to be said for bringing your level of musicianship to the electronic realm. As for applying some Herrmannesque touch to synth writing, there's always the danger of it coming off as unsatisfactory when compared with, say, a real string ensemble doing Herrmann. Still, a valiant challenge.


----------



## David Story

dcoscina @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Here's a good example of a composer largely known for everything other than strong melodies- but he still kicked ass. Listen to the dynamism of this track how he shifts between timbral elements to keep things exciting.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7q7vZSgPlL0
> 
> And here is the main theme
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3zgRnTJ ... re=related
> 
> It's amazing what Herrmann could do with the same instrumentation as Bartok but to come up with a completely different sound.
> 
> Here's the Finale-
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPeT4P5h ... bmdroFiMhK
> 
> To me, this is one of the most emotive cues Herrmann ever wrote. It perfectly balances beauty with a sense of pathos. Probably as close as anyone has gotten to Mahler without actually ripping him off. Love the harmonies here. Herrmann's vocabulary was just amazing. This kind of stuff makes my ears so happy. It's inspiring.



The Finale is great music, timeless art. Inspires composers right up to now. Thanks for sharing!
Mike V's chart makes it clear that not all music is equal, and you can measure it in several ways. 
Hermmann excels in every way. The closest we have to a young artist like that is Bear McCreary. He is inspired by Herrmann, Bernstein, Williams. And Metal  But I agree with Guy, Herrmann is melodic even in his more atmospheric cues. 

Great artists are unique, so there can't be the Next Herrmann or Next Beethoven. But you can find kindred spirits, like Poseur's links.

The War Horse score is fun and profound. Melodic. When I listen, my imagination goes to both adventure and a higher purpose of a life. That's the last measure of great art, transcending time and place it brings you closer to the mystery of your own role in the universe.

It's fine liking both Bach and Gaga. Bach simply gives you a lot more to love.

What surprises me is how technocrats, punks and conservatives always end up on the wrong side of history. You'd think they'd learn to respect timeless art, recognize a visionary. Not be blinded by techno porn or popularity. 

David, I think this forum is full of people that confuse sound and music. So when an unprecedented flood of sound hits, you don't find many kindred spirits who feel turned off. But there's hope.

Also, you went to live orchestra concerts, after that fake orchestras are painful


----------



## José Herring

dcoscina @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> I just got Kontakt 5 and received a free copy of Retro Machines so I've been going through them. Because I began composing in the '80s, when I bring up a sound from then, I immediately think of '80s idiomatic playing. My challenge today is make a piece of music using these sounds but say , in a Herrmann framework. Can I do it? The fun is in the trying....



A good goal. I would suggest getting more of an ear for this from the techniques of musique concrete. It has helped me a lot to understand electronic music and its application in film scoring.

In the end, I've found that anything that you can bring to the table is valid. The only real consideration is that film music because it accompanies film, has a unique aesthetic. You mentioned "Tora, Tora, Tora". To be honest I hadn't heard the score but I checked it out. There's a lot of that stuff that's totally valid today and will work with certain kinds of film. And some of it is just cheezy. So you take what's good about it, and toss what's cheezy about it and you'll have more tools in your arsenal. 

Hans has changed film scoring so much, but not in the way that people think. You don't have to sound like Zimmer to be successful. Even he has admitted that he's so tired of the "uber drum sound". I think for him its something that was wanted and he could do. 

Damn. I'm totally sick physically right now and I can probably babble about this subject all day long. But, I doubt I'm making any real sense. But in all honesty, from hanging at Zimmer's place and from briefly chatting with him, I know the thing that makes him great. It may or may not be his style, but rather his commitment to excellence. Chris Nolan I think described him best. Minimalist composer with maximal production value. Working in Hollywood production value is what sets Hollywood apart from the rest of the world. So Hans has completely given film makers what they want, which is simple music, maximually produced. But, I tell you, the amount of work that it takes to pull off something simple is ridiculous. So then one wonders, that perhaps, simple ideas are not so simple after all. And then I wonder if not, a whole range of simply stated ideas based on more advanced theoretical models has yet to be explored. And, perhaps yet that will be the next great sound to come out of Hollywood. 

But, as Lex stated. The idea that Hollywood is only big drum swooshy sounds, seems to suggest that mostly people are listening to trailers sound fx and not really making it to the movies or watching much TV. Big drum swooshy sounds have almost no place these days in TV and Film scoring. I can't even think of a score in the last two years that sounds like what people typically associate with "epic"(perhaps I just haven't made it to these films).

Sick ramble over.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Verta's banner is just silliness, like somehow modern jazz from (which has never been popular, maybe moreso now) from 60 years ago has anything to do modern pop or hip hop except for a few sampled basslines. The two have been on different tracks for nearly a century. It's also curious that he sees the 'timeline' of African-American music as such, insinuating that it has somehow devolved into lil Wayne. It's actually a fairly insulting banner in light of that. I haven't heard much LW but he's anything like some of the hip hop ive heard in passing I'm willing to bet its as or more rhythmically interesting or fluid as JC in his sheets of sound era. That wouldn't be tough. Some of that stuff (Giant Steps, Black Pearls) is very emotionally detached. Ha, maybe I'm reading the banner all wrong. 

I'd love to hear anything from Bear McCreary on par with anything by Goldsmith or Herrmann.


----------



## José Herring

givemenoughrope @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Verta's banner is just silliness,



That post just demonstrates a lack of knowledge and though probably not intended is racist in a way.

Comparing Coltrane to Wayne Shorter or Winton Marsalis or Herbie Hancock would be a better comparison. Both would represent the higher side of black musical achievement. 

Comparing Lil' Wayne to Cab Calloway would have also been more accurate. Both are commercial parodies of black folks.

Verta's comparison just show's that he himself doesn't understand jazz, hip-hop or the evolution of "black" music. His post is just rude, not very knowledgeable, and insulting.


----------



## David Story

Being sensitive to your own opinion isn't being a sensitive listener.


----------



## givemenoughrope

+1 To Jose 

And although I'm not really into his music what about Flying Lotus? Well-crafted electronic music, unbounded by genre or harmonic confines, not a thug parody.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

+ 1 for Flying Lotus, Esperanza Spalding and Janelle Monae. I'd kill for a concert with that billing!


----------



## Ed

givemenoughrope @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> I'd love to hear anything from Bear McCreary on par with anything by Goldsmith or Herrmann.



Im sure you'll not accept anything because you're emotionally attached to those composers, but here I think is one of Bears best tracks. I chose it because its more of a concert arrangement and no drums or sound design in sight


----------



## José Herring

Ned Bouhalassa @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> + 1 for Flying Lotus, Esperanza Spalding and Janelle Monae. I'd kill for a concert with that billing!



Your musical taste has always inspired me to new directions. Can't wait to check these out.

Jose


----------



## EthanStoller

josejherring @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Comparing Lil' Wayne to Cab Calloway would have also been more accurate. Both are commercial parodies of black folks.


Not to drift too far off topic here, but that is an inaccurate and disrespectful characterization of Cab Calloway. His orchestra circa 1932-1944 produced some truly great music and he mentored many great young jazz musicians who rose to prominence in the late 1940s. And as far as Calloway's position vis a vis race relations of the time, he was a trailblazer for fomenting self-respect in the African-American community. A class act through and through.


----------



## José Herring

EthanStoller @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> josejherring @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Comparing Lil' Wayne to Cab Calloway would have also been more accurate. Both are commercial parodies of black folks.
> 
> 
> 
> Not to drift too far off topic here, but that is an inaccurate and disrespectful characterization of Cab Calloway. His orchestra circa 1932-1944 produced some truly great music and he mentored many great young jazz musicians who rose to prominence in the late 1940s. And as far as Calloway's position vis a vis race relations of the time, he was a trailblazer for fomenting self-respect in the African-American community. A class act through and through.
Click to expand...


I was referring to stuff mostly like Hideho man and more of the "Jive" style. No real disrespect to his finer stuff which I think was just as fine as anything else.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Ed, I actually enjoyed a few moments in there. Still, it smacks of the overly sentimental which is the only there I hear in the brand Bear McCreary. Good, but not for me.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

BTW, and FWIW, although there are exceptions (film music and country), black musicians absolutely OWN my top 5 in many other musical genres: Hendrix, Ellington, Ella, Miles, Prince, Armstrong, Bird, Stevie, Questlove, Robert Johnson, Son House, Coltrane, Quincy Jones, Michael J, Kanye, Missy Elliott, etc, etc, etc.

Comparing Coltrane to Wayne is like comparing Frank Sinatra to Justin Bieber.


----------



## re-peat

__


----------



## Ed

givemenoughrope @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Ed, I actually enjoyed a few moments in there. Still, it smacks of the *overly sentimental* which is the only there I hear in the brand Bear McCreary. Good, but not for me.



its film music :wink:

Not sure what overly sentimental means considering you referenced some other film composers like Goldsmith.


----------



## KEnK

givemenoughrope @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Verta's banner is just silliness, like somehow modern jazz from (which has never been popular, maybe moreso now) from 60 years ago has anything to do modern pop or hip hop except for a few sampled basslines. The two have been on different tracks for nearly a century. It's also curious that he sees the 'timeline' of African-American music as such, insinuating that it has somehow devolved into lil Wayne. It's actually a fairly insulting banner in light of that. I haven't heard much LW but he's anything like some of the hip hop ive heard in passing I'm willing to bet its as or more rhythmically interesting or fluid as JC in his sheets of sound era. That wouldn't be tough. Some of that stuff (Giant Steps, Black Pearls) is very emotionally detached. Ha, maybe I'm reading the banner all wrong.


Certainly M.V. can speak for himself~
What I got out of it is the parallel de-evolution of Black Music and Film Music.
It's also happening in Rock music. 

Very telling that you think a looped back beat is more "interesting", and that Coltrane is emotionally detached. 
I've actually never heard anyone say that.
Seems also that you skipped a few Chapters of your African American Music History book if you think they have nothing to do w/ one another.

k


----------



## Ed

KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Seems also that you skipped a few Chapters of your African American Music History book if you think they have nothing to do w/ one another.
> 
> k



Hop hop didnt originate from jazz.

Wiki:



> "Much like dub music, hip hop as a DJing form started with no vocals and was purely of an electronic nature. However, the roots of spoken hip hop music are found in African-American music and ultimately African music, particularly that of the griots of West African culture.[17] The African-American traditions of signifyin', the dozens, and jazz poetry all influence hip hop music, as well as the call and response patterns of African and African-American religious ceremonies. Soul singer James Brown, and musical 'comedy' acts such as Rudy Ray Moore and Blowfly are often considered "godfathers" of hip hop music."


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Andrew Christie @ Wed Nov 30 said:


> Dan-Jay @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> There are alot of Beethoven/Mozart/John Williams fanboys out there and that's something that annoyes me. They just can't let go of them and find something new. Seriously move on lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> That wasn't really my point haha. The great music of the past is incredibly valuable and should be praised and admired. I'll never let go of John Williams, he's been one of life long idols.
> 
> 
> 
> Kralc @ Thu Dec 01 said:
> 
> 
> 
> But don't the electronic musicians look down at the violinists, claiming their stuff is old and worn out and needs to keep up with the times?
> 
> But whose to say that some of the violinists don't enjoy the electronic music? And probably some of those electronic musicians came to love synths from hearing switched-on Bach.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Exactly, musicians from any background, skill or genre can be elitist. I know a lot of guys who think they're too cool for orchestral music lol.
Click to expand...


"Elitist" has become synonymous for" "this guy obviously has a lot more chops and knowledge than I do and has the colossal nerve to maintain it makes him artistically superior to me." :twisted:


----------



## noiseboyuk

Interesting Peat - but if a musical appreciation cannot be put into words, and that counts it out of discussion... where does that leave us? You suggest musical beauty is a totem... in other words anyone with an appreciation of musical beauty will agree - say - that Beethoven is "better" than Mozart, with no need to justify such a position from either an intellectual or even emotional perspective. It just IS, much like numbers just ARE, an objective truth to be revealed. It doesn't sound like there's much room for a divergence of experience in musical appreciation, you're either in the club or you're not.

Is that right? Or - in fact - is musical beauty in the ear of the beholder? In which case.... huh?


----------



## givemenoughrope

KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> What I got out of it is the parallel de-evolution of Black Music and Film Music.
> It's also happening in Rock music.


There is no de-evolution happening in black music or rock music. You are just listening to the wrong stuff. Dig once in a while instead of letting stuff just hit you.



KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Very telling that you think a looped back beat is more "interesting", and that Coltrane is emotionally detached.
> I've actually never heard anyone say that.


Very telling that think it's impossible that it could be knowing full well what's out there; Steve Reich to Hank Schocklee. 
As much as I love and hv transcribed JC, he ignored his rhythmic side for years. He was also a drug addict and an obsessive, therefore some of his records sound like woodshedding. That's no secret. You know how the story ends.



KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Seems also that you skipped a few Chapters of your African American Music History book if you think they have nothing to do w/ one another


What book would that be?


----------



## José Herring

KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Certainly M.V. can speak for himself~
> What I got out of it is the parallel de-evolution of Black Music and Film Music.
> It's also happening in Rock music.
> 
> k



Mike's assumption is just riddled with ignorance. It's ignorant and insulting because it assumes that blacks are associated with one type of music that hip-hop is the inevitable de-evolution of Jazz. If I had made a comparison that Dave Brubeck de-evolved into Britney Spears, because after all it's "white" music, everybody would think that I was a fool. But because they are both black some how it's ok to equate some stupid rap artist as the de-evolution of one of America's highest art forms--Jazz. Would you say that the evolution of "white" music is represented by comparing Stravinsky to Jessica Black? That would be foolish to say the least.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Cant put it more plainly than that, Jose.

I enjoyed repeats post. It gives the Copland theory, that music is sound, emotion and math, a real run for its money. Thanks.


----------



## Marko Zirkovich

re-peat @ 12/3/2011 said:


> (By ‘beauty’ I don’t necessarily mean ‘appealing beauty’ as most would normally understand it, because in music, as in all art, uglyness can have great esthetic value as well, thus becoming, paradoxically perhaps, _beauty_. Maybe ‘appeal’ or ‘richness’ or, somewhat less tainted with appreciation, ‘content’ would be preferable terms to use, but I’ll stick with ‘beauty’ for now.)



There's an interesting quote about paintings and beauty attributed to the 13th century philosopher Bonaventura that goes something like this (paraphrasing due to me translating from German to English): "You call the image of the devil beautiful when it depicts the devil's ugliness well and therefore itself is ugly."

So, "ugliness" might also have its place in music, right?
Btw, I like how you've brought various levels of beauty into play. That's definitely something to ponder.


----------



## Ed

josejherring @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Certainly M.V. can speak for himself~
> What I got out of it is the parallel de-evolution of Black Music and Film Music.
> It's also happening in Rock music.
> 
> k
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mike's assumption is just riddled with ignorance. It's ignorant and insulting because it assumes that blacks are associated with one type of music that hip-hop is the inevitable de-evolution of Jazz. If I had made a comparison that Dave Brubeck de-evolved into Britney Spears, because after all it's "white" music, everybody would think that I was a fool. But because they are both black some how it's ok to equate some stupid rap artist as the de-evolution of one of America's highest art forms--Jazz. Would you say that the evolution of "white" music is represented by comparing Stravinsky to Jessica Black? That would be foolish to say the least.
Click to expand...


Its not even a racist ignorance before anyone starts saying that. Its based on the point I made earlier, that some people see music as a hierarchical ladder ranging from terrible music to great music. Thats why to him jazz can be compared to hip hop like this. Hip Hop didnt even come from jazz, it originated from electronic music and African tribal music. Even if he himself was just being satirical (in that sense its funny) , thats how many people here really do see music which is the source of so many fights like this one. They cannot understand how someone can think two pieces of music are genius, when they look at one that is Beethoven and the other a piece of electronic music.

You know if you remove all talk of classical music here, you can have the same fight about electronic music. Seems a lot of people here dont know that not all electronic music is equal. Some is better than others, some spend weeks coming up with a single bass sound and processing drum sounds. Go look at *real* electronic music producers. They know mathematical frequencies better than any classical composer because they look at sound at its essence. Doesnt make them better, its just two difference kinds of appreciation of sound. You find the same elitist snobs in all genres of music and I think its okay to be one to an extent, just be humble enough to realise that its not "_orchestral music vs everything else and that none of the "anything else" really matters."_


----------



## José Herring

I actually agree.


----------



## KEnK

Ed-

It would seem that your Wiki quote supports what I said,
that they are related, I didn't say Hip Hop came from Jazz.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
givemenoughrope-

_"There is no de-evolution happening in black music..."_

I'm a Jazz musician. 
At most of my gigs these days I'm the only white person in the room.
This is what many (perhaps most) Black Jazz musicians think.
Wynton Marsalis has said it as well. 
Sorry, I can't quote the source, maybe the Ken Burns Jazz doc or some other PBS Jazz special.

_"I love and hv transcribed JC, he ignored his rhythmic side for years..."
_
? Sorry- That's ridiculous. His music transcends beat and meter, it doesn't ignore it.

_"He was also a drug addict and an obsessive, therefore some of his records sound like woodshedding. That's no secret. You know how the story ends..."_

Coltrane died of liver cancer after being clean for many years.
I guess nobody in Hip Hop does drugs.
Coltrane altered Jazz about 3 times in a span of 5-7 years.
He practiced alot, but I never heard a record of his that sounds like woodshedding.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jose-

I thought Mike was just having a little fun.
I think you're reading to much into it, 
but I will say again lots of my Black musician pals think something like that.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Also the point missed here is again,
*A Looped based Music made on computers by people who are more engineers than musicians.* 

Rap or Hip Hop has been around since the late 70's.
This is more than 40 years.
Look at a 40 year span of any style of music that's played by musicians.
Which has undergone more evolution?

Looped based Music is by nature inferior.
Before people get all huffy that this is an unprovable opinion,
I'll remind you that Humans are sentient beings.
Sentient beings (like my cat for instance) 
prefer continuoisly changing stimulus to repetition, which induces boredom.
This is why Trailer Music Sucks.

Ken


----------



## José Herring

KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Jose-
> 
> I thought Mike was just having a little fun.
> I think you're reading to much into it,
> but I will say again lots of my Black musician pals think something like that.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> 
> 
> Ken



Then your "black musician friends" need to be educated in their field. Comparing the two is like comparing a french impressionist composer to blue grass music. After all impressionism and blue grass are done by whites and at times employ a major scale! Absurd my good fellow.


----------



## Ed

KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Ed-
> 
> It would seem that your Wiki quote supports what I said,
> that they are related, I didn't say Hip Hop came from Jazz.



In a sense that *all *music is related, sure? :| 





> Looped based Music is by nature inferior.
> Before people get all huffy that this is an unprovable opinion,
> I'll remind you that Humans are sentient beings.
> Sentient beings (like my cat for instance)
> prefer continuoisly changing stimulus to repetition, which induces boredom.
> This is why Trailer Music Sucks.



Again with the generalisation that all trailer music is loop based. wow. :lol: I wish you guys would just say I dont like it because its too simplistic and over the top and Im sick of all the drums, choirs and how so much sounds similar. That I get! But saying stuff like this just is ridiculous.

I also like how you make generalisations about all human nature, rather bizzare considering so many people clearly DO like loop based music. I guess they are sub human or something to you. You cant change human nature just because you want it to be different :lol: :lol:


----------



## givemenoughrope

Ken, congrats on being the only white guy in the room. This is very obviously not that room. 

John Coltrane admitted to not developing his approach rhythmically (as opposed to harmonically) well up to the modal era and way before the free era as opposed to say Sonny Rollins who dominated rhythm like Michael Jordan. Saying he transcends bars and beats is not the kind of babbletalk I'd expect from a musician, even a jazz musician, but unfortunately preaching from the book of Wynton is. It still is. In 2011. Wynton who dismisses all of the eras of Jazz he has no use for and cant sell by rehashing. If you are going to assume someone else's stance at least make it Branford's. And if you can't tell that is some zombie playing going on during JCs heavy drug days, I don't know what to tell you.


----------



## KEnK

Yeah, you guys are right.

I'm going to start educating my black musician friends that Eminem is much better than that Zombie Coltrane.

Thanks for straightening me out here.


----------



## Ed

I hear a sound, its the sound of KEnK missing the point


----------



## José Herring

KEnK @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Yeah, you guys are right.
> 
> I'm going to start educating my black musicians friends that Eminem is much better than that Zombie Coltrane.
> 
> Thanks for straightening me out here.



What???? Obviously not even reading my post. Why do I bother?


----------



## givemenoughrope

Ken, look up what Branford has said about JC over the years. I only take issue with his drug use. He has a lot more to say and it's not pretty. 

It's too common for jazz musicians to complain about the banality of pop music. It's the most boring tune they play. They can barely fake the changes. I'm here all week...


----------



## KEnK

Sorry Guys-

I'm kinda busy makin' beats here.

Y'know what I like?

When the snare hits the 3 every time.

Cool!


----------



## SergeD

dcoscina @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> Here's the Finale-
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPeT4P5h ... bmdroFiMhK
> 
> ...Probably as close as anyone has gotten to Mahler without actually ripping him off.



Why not a Ravel mashup of 

Daphnis Et Chloé 1:46 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZZEqwkqF3U&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZZEqwkq ... re=related)

and

Pavane Pour Une Infante Défunte 5:20
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4GBagdf-Bs&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4GBagdf ... re=related)

I wish I could have half his talent.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Ok, I'm just going to say it. 

You have every right to prefer the work of i.e. Lil' Wayne to John Coltrane but if when you listen to them both if every neuron in your brain does not tell you that you are listening to a much higher level of musician when you listen to Coltrane, you are not much of a musician.


----------



## MichaelL

poseur @ Thu Dec 01 said:


> [
> and, practically speaking?
> sometimes, it's whom we've decided to work-for
> and/or the nature of the project to which we've committed ourselves..




The epiphany for me came when I realized that there aren't many films that I want to watch once, let alone the number of times necessary to write the score, particularly the ones the lend themselves to the kind of score that David describes.

I think it's age. Once you get out of the cherished 18 -34 demographic, they don't make many movies for you.


----------



## dcoscina

I agree


----------



## noiseboyuk

Yesterday I watched The Great Muppet Caper with the kids - a film made in 1981. It looked old, it sounded old, some of the jokes played really old, and the kids still loved it. Hey, it's the Muppets and they rock - some jokes play old, some are timeless. Fantastic John Cleese cameo, by the way.

Anyway. The score fascinated me. Not the songs - the songs are the songs and are great - but the score. Boy, that sounded really, really old I have to say, on all levels - technically of course, but the style of scoring comedy was old. And I got to thinking - it would have taken far more musical skill to produce that score than even a good modern fully orchestral score for the same film.

But here's the point. I genuinely didn't like that old style in this case. To my ears it didn't suit the comedy well. It trampled over some jokes, it over-pointed up others. Moments of tension were thrown away. I found myself wishing for a score that did its job better. You can easily brush off the old look, the technically old sound, but this was a deeper problem.

OK, just one example I know. The reason I mention it is that... and I'm sorry to go on like a stuck record, but it IS the most important consideration here by a mile... it wasn't a good storytelling score, in my highly subjective view. Maybe how we tell stories has changed, or maybe this score always wasn't very good. But the extra musical skill that was required to score that film didn't help in that primary function. In a comedy movie, the score is really important, it totally sells the kind of comedy you are doing (for "storytelling" read "joke-telling" as well). Get it wrong, and it can really hurt the film.

We keep coming back to discussing the music in isolation. I want to keep discussing telling stories - that's what film music is designed to do. With Williams, I hear how his great musical skill helps him to tell stories better. But it isn't always the case - I'd argue that with some other composers, it would have been possible to tell a story better with less skill. It may be less to appreciate in isolation, but it might make for telling better stories.

Of course the other side to all that is that there are plenty of contemporary scores that to a terrible job at storytelling too. I'm not arguing that the opposite is true, merely that greater musical skill doesn't automatically make you better at your job.


----------



## Resoded

noiseboyuk @ 4th December 2011 said:


> Yesterday I watched The Great Muppet Caper with the kids - a film made in 1981. It looked old, it sounded old, some of the jokes played really old, and the kids still loved it. Hey, it's the Muppets and they rock - some jokes play old, some are timeless. Fantastic John Cleese cameo, by the way.
> 
> Anyway. The score fascinated me. Not the songs - the songs are the songs and are great - but the score. Boy, that sounded really, really old I have to say, on all levels - technically of course, but the style of scoring comedy was old. And I got to thinking - it would have taken far more musical skill to produce that score than even a good modern fully orchestral score for the same film.
> 
> But here's the point. I genuinely didn't like that old style in this case. To my ears it didn't suit the comedy well. It trampled over some jokes, it over-pointed up others. Moments of tension were thrown away. I found myself wishing for a score that did its job better. You can easily brush off the old look, the technically old sound, but this was a deeper problem.
> 
> OK, just one example I know. The reason I mention it is that... and I'm sorry to go on like a stuck record, but it IS the most important consideration here by a mile... it wasn't a good storytelling score, in my highly subjective view. Maybe how we tell stories has changed, or maybe this score always wasn't very good. But the extra musical skill that was required to score that film didn't help in that primary function. In a comedy movie, the score is really important, it totally sells the kind of comedy you are doing (for "storytelling" read "joke-telling" as well). Get it wrong, and it can really hurt the film.
> 
> We keep coming back to discussing the music in isolation. I want to keep discussing telling stories - that's what film music is designed to do. With Williams, I hear how his great musical skill helps him to tell stories better. But it isn't always the case - I'd argue that with some other composers, it would have been possible to tell a story better with less skill. It may be less to appreciate in isolation, but it might make for telling better stories.
> 
> Of course the other side to all that is that there are plenty of contemporary scores that to a terrible job at storytelling too. I'm not arguing that the opposite is true, merely that greater musical skill doesn't automatically make you better at your job.



This reminds me of the tv-series Stargate SG1. If you listen to the scoring on the later seasons, everything feels fine, but when you go back to the very first episodes, everything is just so wrong. Bombastic old school action music in the wrong scenes. And that bombastic style kind of gives a creepy and disturbing feeling, but the scene weren't creepy at all.

I noticed this last week and it made me think about your point with telling a story and how destructive it can be not to tell the same story as the picture.


----------



## dcoscina

I think television has actually transcended films as a more creative vehicle for music in some cases. LOST had its fair share of really outstanding music cues during its run and while The Cape was so atrocious that the network pulled it after 4 episodes. McCreary's score was actually pretty killer. Loved his Human Target scores too. He definitely has the chops and love of music. His blogs are always great to read. He really enjoys the process of composing, something you don't hear as much from the film composers these days.

I think at this stage, were I lucky enough to get a paying gig, I'd opt for television because there seem to be more daring directors working in that medium than film perhaps...


----------



## noiseboyuk

dcoscina @ Sun Dec 04 said:


> I think television has actually transcended films as a more creative vehicle for music in some cases. LOST had its fair share of really outstanding music cues during its run and while The Cape was so atrocious that the network pulled it after 4 episodes. McCreary's score was actually pretty killer. Loved his Human Target scores too. He definitely has the chops and love of music. His blogs are always great to read. He really enjoys the process of composing, something you don't hear as much from the film composers these days.
> 
> I think at this stage, were I lucky enough to get a paying gig, I'd opt for television because there seem to be more daring directors working in that medium than film perhaps...



A lot of truth in that. True of the artform in general. Twin Peaks changed everything... TV is no longer the poor relation. Of course there's still way more dross than good stuff (Terra Nova etc). but when it's good it's good. Definitely with you on Lost, some absolutely outstanding work over 6 years there.

Not only drama either. 30 Rock is worthy of mention - it's not 100% my style, but I love that it's all a real band and scored with old school skill. Course it helps there that composer happens to be the producer. And sleeps with the star.

*thinks*... THAT gives me an idea....


----------



## dcoscina

Yes indeed. Lots of great music written for television. And truthfully for film if I were to look start looking and listening more...

Sorry guys. Didn't mean to stir things up. Rough last week for many reasons... working on a couple of my own pieces helped clear my head.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

I think you have nothing to apologize for, as your post inspired a spirited, sometimes-educational debate!


----------



## José Herring

dcoscina @ Sun Dec 04 said:


> I think television has actually transcended films as a more creative vehicle for music in some cases. LOST had its fair share of really outstanding music cues during its run and while The Cape was so atrocious that the network pulled it after 4 episodes. McCreary's score was actually pretty killer. Loved his Human Target scores too. He definitely has the chops and love of music. His blogs are always great to read. He really enjoys the process of composing, something you don't hear as much from the film composers these days.
> 
> I think at this stage, were I lucky enough to get a paying gig, I'd opt for television because there seem to be more daring directors working in that medium than film perhaps...



Tv is the new film. Film is the new long form infomercial.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> _Mike
> Big version



Oh this is so good. This says it all.


----------



## P.T.

SergeD @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> dcoscina @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Here's the Finale-
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPeT4P5h ... bmdroFiMhK
> 
> ...Probably as close as anyone has gotten to Mahler without actually ripping him off.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why not a Ravel mashup of
> 
> Daphnis Et Chloé 1:46
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZZEqwkqF3U&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZZEqwkq ... re=related)
> 
> and
> 
> Pavane Pour Une Infante Défunte 5:20
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4GBagdf-Bs&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4GBagdf ... re=related)
> 
> I wish I could have half his talent.
Click to expand...


Interesting that you should post this.

I have been listening to the Daphnis et Chloe suite the past few days.

This version;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d20zsMPoktE&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d20zsMPo ... re=related)


----------



## sbkp

Jeffrey Peterson @ Sun Dec 04 said:


> mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mike
> Big version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh this is so good. This says it all.
Click to expand...


The problem I have with this graphic is that it actually misses the point by clouding it in an unnecessary racial context.

You could make that graphic about ANY race. And you could make it lots of styles. How about demonstrating the first half of the 20th century's music among whites. You could start with The Rite of Spring and compare it to Cage's 4'33". You don't need to make it about race at all. How about comparing Copland with Culture Club (20th century gay whites?)? Or John Coltrane vs Kenny G for the decline of jazz?

And anyway, there's also GREAT music being made today (by all races).

I admit I laughed when I first saw it. After thinking about it, though, I ended up here.

Maybe I'm being uptight. I'm all for pointing out how art is going the wrong direction, but it bugs me when it gets done this way. Sorry if I'm just being a buzz kill.


----------



## Kralc

I just read this in an article,



> * On Hollywood scores: ”John Williams is a great musician but, wow, enough John. It isn’t his choice, of course, it’s the directors who allow him to take over a film and tell you exactly what you should be feeling every second of every minute of the film. I want people to come out with very different ideas of what the film is so they are real participants in the film as opposed to just paying observers. Most films now won’t let you in.”


 From here: http://herocomplex.latimes.com/2011/12/ ... nsformers/

I do personally disagree with him here, movies aren't books. You're not constantly having to create a world in your head, being guided by the text. I kinda want to be shown where to go, and experience it all. I know that the music has a significant impact on directing the audience, but so does direction and what the audience is seeing and not seeing. But again like we've discovered in this thread, it's his opinion, and I respect that. :wink: Just thought it was interesting what non-composers think.

I can sorta agree with him on Tintin though, that movie moved quite fast.


----------



## Saxer

i think most of the actual film music development has to do with the use of virtual orchestras.

all scores produced today have to be mocked up first to get an ok for recording real orchestra. that means: all desicions are based on sample stuff. and what's the best sounding sample stuff? yeah, drums and staccatos! what sucks with samples? yeah, heart warming melodies: they mostly sound too static. so probably a lot of music which would sound great with real orchestra never gets recorded. just imagine morricones scores as a mockup...

in former times the ok for a score was given after listening to a piano version. and what sounds great on piano? yeah, chord changes, melodies and virtuos movements. what sucks on a piano? yeah, drums and staccato ostinatos... they sound as if there was never a musical idea! just imagine a piano version of inception...

so there's still hope! the virtual instruments are getting better and better and can soon convince a listener even for rich harmonies and melodic lines.


----------



## Dan Mott

Just want to say I absolutely hate Lil Wayne :D. 

But.......... I love TAIKOS!!


----------



## Kralc

Just a word of warning, don't search for "Piano Inception" or "Piano Inception Mombasa" unless you have a serious appreciation for kids playing poorly tuned pianos at fff.

How do you guys feel about Kanye West?


----------



## TheUnfinished

Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mike
> Big version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh this is so good. This says it all.
Click to expand...

Not really. It couldn't say less about music if it tried.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

TheUnfinished @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mike
> Big version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh this is so good. This says it all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. It couldn't say less about music if it tried.
Click to expand...


Well whether you agree with it or not it says a LOT about music. It says that music used to be rich melodic, and harmonically complex, and now it is mostly simple and about the rhythm.

Jazz and rock are direct descendants of the blues, and that was largely brought into our culture by African Americans. And Hip-hp/Rap was largely brought into our culture by African Americans. That is just factually correct and it is no more racist than saying the NBA is comprised predominantly of Black players.


----------



## TheUnfinished

If I disagree with what the image says, how can I then agree it says a lot about music if that's the image's message?

What it says to me is that generally jazz is more melodically and harmonically complex than hip-hop. I've no disagreement with that. Hip-hop doesn't set out to be terribly complex, whereas a lot of jazz deliberately tries to be melodically complex, provocative even. So, it's an utterly moot point to compare the two in any historical context. It says a lot about the creator of the image that they have chosen an innovative jazz exponent and someone who would not even be classed as innovative within hip hop circles.

It says nothing about music in a wider context, other than that two music genres which bare little resemblance to each other evolved at different periods in history.

Was Coltrane a more talented musician than Lil Wayne? By a mile. Would I listen to either? No. Does comparing the two achieve anything? Not a single thing, unless you particularly believe the two epitomise the pinnacle of black music from their eras. And if you think that, you're nuts.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

TheUnfinished @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> If I disagree with what the image says, how can I then agree it says a lot about music if that's the image's message?
> 
> What it says to me is that generally jazz is more melodically and harmonically complex than hip-hop. I've no disagreement with that. Hip-hop doesn't set out to be terribly complex, whereas a lot of jazz deliberately tries to be melodically complex, provocative even. So, it's an utterly moot point to compare the two in any historical context. It says a lot about the creator of the image that they have chosen an innovative jazz exponent and someone who would not even be classed as innovative within hip hop circles.
> 
> It says nothing about music in a wider context, other than that two music genres which bare little resemblance to each other evolved at different periods in history.
> 
> Was Coltrane a more talented musician than Lil Wayne? By a mile. Would I listen to either? No. Does comparing the two achieve anything? Not a single thing, unless you particularly believe the two epitomise the pinnacle of black music from their eras. And if you think that, you're nuts.



It is not contradictory to say i.e. "this says a lot about music but I disagree with what it says.'

The deniers can keep denying or saying that it does not make the music inferior just different but the simple fact is that taken as w whole, music (outside the concert hall world) is dumbed down melodically and harmonically, just as with language vocabulary, grammar, and syntax has been dumbed down.

I reserve the right, as apparently do several others here, to pronounce this a bad thing. Not just _different_, _worse_.

With that, I'm done, I have a deadline to meet.


----------



## Andrew Christie

mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:


> _Mike
> Big version



While I do understand people taking this as a racist implication, I can see the intent of this as a 'devolution' of 'sophistication' as Jay has pointed out. My quarrel is this need to incessantly bang on that there is not enough musically rich material to get in to. Maybe I'm deaf, inexperienced and not mature enough, but guys like John Powell, JNH and HZ (loud and proud fan, have you heard his Singapore suite from pirates?) are currently giving me a feast for the ears in their musicality.

Maybe because I was bought up on a lot of pop music also that I appreciate the difficulty of writing killer tunes for the masses. If someone told me to write a 'Bad Romance' in a day, I'd be stumped...IT'S NOT EASY! There's a difference in being sophisticatedly simple and stupidly simple. 

I contradict myself and maybe I'm a hack, but I just feel the vibe, man, if ya get my drift. 


Peace 
o-[][]-o


----------



## sbkp

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> It is not contradictory to say i.e. "this says a lot about music but I disagree with what it says.'
> 
> The deniers can keep denying or saying that it does not make the music inferior just different but the simple fact is that taken as w whole, music (outside the concert hall world) is dumbed down melodically and harmonically, just as with language vocabulary, grammar, and syntax has been dumbed down.
> 
> I reserve the right, as apparently do several others here, to pronounce this a bad thing. Not just _different_, _worse_.
> 
> With that, I'm done, I have a deadline to meet.



The problem I have with the graphic is that it's a gross oversimplification. Yes, it shows the difference between those two songs. Call the new one worse if you want - I have no quarrel with that assessment.

But what about all the amazing music that's being made today? Not _all_ new music is inferior. And not _all_ old music was superior.

I have a deadline, too. See you on the other side


----------



## Ed

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Well whether you agree with it or not it says a LOT about music. It says that music used to be rich melodic, and harmonically complex, and now it is mostly simple and about the rhythm.



Well no, since at the time of John Contrane we still had "simple" music. Hip hip did not "evolve" from jazz anyway, it came from *traditional *African music and electronic music. So aside from satire, its a pretty stupid graphic *if* there's meant to be a serious point behind it. 



> Jazz and rock are direct descendants of the blues, and that was largely brought into our culture by African Americans. And Hip-hp/Rap was largely brought into our culture by African Americans. That is just factually correct and it is no more racist than saying the NBA is comprised predominantly of Black players.



And we *still *have blues and rock sooooooo........?


----------



## mverta

I don't know who created the graphic; it was posted on Facebook by one of the top studio orchestral musicians on Earth, and I dug it. Certainly, for me, it perfectly encapsulates what's happened to the quality of music, which in a nutshell, is that the definition for "musician" has become so broad as to be meaningless. Being able to carry a tune, rhyme, and find a beat doesn't make one a musician. It makes one musical. In my lean days, I used to install sound systems in churches in South Central LA... talk about a musical people! Holy Christ! But not everyone raising the roof was a musician.

Still, the broad displacement of the talented by the less-than-talented isn't confined to the world of music. It's a general, societal trend. It's not that they don't make 'em like they used to; it's that they don't sell them anymore.


_Mike


----------



## Ed

mverta @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> the quality of music, which in a nutshell, is that the definition for "musician" has become so broad as to be meaningless.



....WUT?

Are you seriously suggesting that Hip Hop or African Music or whatever else is by definition - *not *- music?

:| 

I think loads of music is just terrible, like Rebecca Black's Friday song for example, but its still by definition music whether I want it to be or not. I'd love for you to give a definition of music that can make sense and this not be the case. In fact if you do take issue with this post Im going to have to ask you to do that because otherwise there's nothing for you to say.


You say some weird things sometimes Mike, really weird things.


----------



## noiseboyuk

I feel a storm's 'a brewin'....


----------



## mverta

Ed @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> ....WUT?
> 
> Are you seriously suggesting that Hip Hop or African Music or whatever else is by definition - *not *- music?



No.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

Andrew Christie @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mike
> Big version
> 
> 
> 
> If someone told me to write a 'Bad Romance' in a day, I'd be stumped...IT'S NOT EASY! There's a difference in being sophisticatedly simple and stupidly simple.
> 
> I contradict myself and maybe I'm a hack, but I just feel the vibe, man, if ya get my drift.
> 
> 
> Peace
> o-[][]-o
Click to expand...


lol Bad Romance by Lady Gaga...creative? Hard to write? I agree that the production side and the marketing side is a tuff egg to crack because you don't know what kids are going to buy these days... but as far as the writing?


Andrew...
----Its 3 chords... 

with her riding the tonic minor pretty much the whole verses and then VI, VII, i over and over for the chorus. Its a way common chord progression.

There is some variances, like i III VI in the verses buts its basically just home minor playing the whole time.

----And the beat is Kick...Snare...Kick...Snare...Kick...Snare. 

----And finally the lyrics...Ra Ra Ram Ma Ma Ga Ga Oool la la want your bad romance.
If you read the rest of the lyrics you'll hopefully see that they are just as bad as the one I just cited. 
The problem is kids are so ignorant that they actually think that they are the only ones who can see genius in crap lyrics. Lady Gaga wrote those lyrics to SOUND like they are a mystery waiting to be cracked....but there is nothing there. 

The rest is where the art lies, in the production side and the engineering side.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

@ED of course its music...its dumbed down simplistic music that the lazy, brain dead leeches of this country want. The typical hip hop/pop/rap artist barely made it through high school...if they even graduated. They only know the most basic fundamentals of music and its disgusting. Kids now a days should be worshiping Hayden as much as they worship a guy who hits his girlfriend(Rihanna) and still remains in the top 40. I don't know why your choosing to argue about nothing ED. Of course Mike wasn't implying that. 
@The Unfinished I would listen to Eastwest Lurker, logic is the only winner in the real world and Eastwest Lurker has it.


Stop making this a racist thing....its not.


----------



## Ed

mverta @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Ed @ Mon Dec 05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ....WUT?
> 
> Are you seriously suggesting that Hip Hop or African Music or whatever else is by definition - *not *- music?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No.
Click to expand...


Then what did you mean writing...

_"that the definition for "musician" has become so broad as to be meaningless."_


----------



## Ed

Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> @ED of course its music...its dumbed down simplistic music that the lazy, brain dead leeches of this country want. The typical hip hop/pop/rap artist barely made it through high school...if they even graduated. They only know the most basic fundamentals of music and its disgusting. Kids now a days should be worshiping Hayden as much as they worship a guy who hits his girlfriend(Rihanna) and still remains in the top 40. I don't know why your choosing to argue about nothing ED. Of course Mike wasn't implying that. Stick to logic ED and you'll get through.



I quoted Mike, did you see? He seems to be saying that you cant call yourself a musician if you make hip hop music (for example) because otherwise he says that makes the definition meaningless. How did I misunderstand something he specifically wrote?

I agree people like a lot of crap pop music. 




> Stop making this a racist thing....its not.



I don't know who is saying the graphic is a racist thing, its just an ignorant comparison that makes no sense factually. The fact that its used "African American music" is, I agree, immaterial.


----------



## noiseboyuk

Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> lol Bad Romance by Lady Gaga...creative? Hard to write? I agree that the production side and the marketing side is a tuff egg to crack because you don't know what kids are going to buy these days... but as far as the writing?
> 
> 
> Andrew...
> ----Its 3 chords...
> 
> with her riding the tonic minor pretty much the whole verses and then VI, VII, i over and over for the chorus. Its a way common chord progression.
> 
> There is some variances, like i III VI in the verses buts its basically just home minor playing the whole time.
> 
> ----And the beat is Kick...Snare...Kick...Snare...Kick...Snare.
> 
> ----And finally the lyrics...Ra Ra Ram Ma Ma Ga Ga Oool la la want your bad romance.
> If you read the rest of the lyrics you'll hopefully see that they are just as bad as the one I just cited.
> The problem is kids are so ignorant that they actually think that they are the only ones who can see genius in crap lyrics. Lady Gaga wrote those lyrics to SOUND like they are a mystery waiting to be cracked....but there is nothing there.
> 
> The rest is where the art lies, in the production side and the engineering side.



Great pop always sounds easy, and can be deconstructed in a paragraph.

Funny how much harder it is to come up with it in the first place though.


----------



## José Herring

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Jazz and rock are direct descendants of the blues, and that was largely brought into our culture by African Americans. And Hip-hp/Rap was largely brought into our culture by African Americans. That is just factually correct and it is no more racist than saying the NBA is comprised predominantly of Black players.



That's missing the point a bit. 

My issue is that the graphic is largely racist because it takes into consideration only race. 

Like I said before if somebody had made a graphic that equated Stravinsky to Britney Spears with a caption that stated, "the evolution of white music", then nobody would have thought it made any sense. But, all of a sudden because they're both "black" then making a comparison between John Coltrane and Li'l Wayne is suddenly "ok" and reflects the evolution of "black" music. It's offensive because it only takes race into consideration. It makes the assumption that a) there's only "black" music and that they are somehow all related(again, because it's black people after all), and b) that Hip-hop rap has anything to do with Jazz(again because after all they are both predominately black forms of music). See the only common denominator is "black". So how is that not racist? It would be like comparing Booker T. Washington to Bubba Smith and then saying, "look at how far black people have fallen". It's a typical white response to black culture that it gets all lumped together in the mind of whites and that there's somehow only 1 kind of "black" people. Those people. No, blacks are individuals. John Coltrane's contemporaries are guys like Wayne Shorter, Herbie Handcock, Brandford M., Winton M. ect...... Certainly not Lil'wayne.

And non-melodic music has been around since the dawn of time: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GEgdNUF5Ok&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GEgdNUF ... re=related)


Oh, and to think that Jazz only came from the blues is not entirely accurate. Jazz came from Ragtime, which was a deliberate attempt by Scott Joplin to infuse African American Rhythms and scales into Western music. So Jazz is quite literally a blend of western and African rhythm scales and modes.


----------



## mverta

It's all music; everything is music; the fart that comes out of your ass is music and everyone's a musician and Beethoven is music and Boulez is musiceventhoughmygoddamn15month-oldcrieswhenhehearsitandsmileswhenhehearsMozart but that's just because music is subjective and tonality is transient and we're living in a glorious time of artistic nirvana. The End.


----------



## TheUnfinished

Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> @The Unfinished I would listen to Eastwest Lurker, logic is the only winner in the real world and Eastwest Lurker has it.


I do listen to Jay, he often has some very interesting things on VI. I just happen to disagree with him on this particular subject. I could be persuaded, but I tend to be persuaded by arguments not statements.

Oh, and like Ed, I didn't particularly find the image racist. Just stupid.


----------



## givemenoughrope

mverta @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> I don't know who created the graphic; it was posted on Facebook by one of the top studio orchestral musicians on Earth... the definition for "musician" has become so broad as to be meaningless.



I agree with that about the definition which is why I won't take this opinion by a session musician regarding the history of black music in America as anything more than a narrow-minded gripe since they aren't necessarily an artist, musicologist or qualified social critic; just someone who can read down a chart.


----------



## Ed

mverta @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> It's all music; everything is music; the fart that comes out of your ass is music and everyone's a musician and Beethoven is music and Boulez is musiceventhoughmygoddamn15month-oldcrieswhenhehearsitandsmileswhenhehearsMozart but that's just because music is subjective and tonality is transient and we're living in a glorious time of artistic nirvana. The End.



So when I asked you if you were saying that calling Hip Hop and African Tribal music makes the definition of music meaningless, and therefore by definition they should not be called music and you said no, you actually meant yes.  Maybe you misunderstood me, thats okay,

Music is intentionally organised sound that someone says is music, it may be terrible, it may be stupid, it may be a tune of pitched fart sounds with a fart backbeat, but that is the only definition that actually makes sense.

If you disagree, then provide a definition of music that can include something like Beethoven and *not *include Hop Hop or Rebecca Black's Friday or something.

If a definition of music does not enable us to actually look at something and tell if it really is music or not, then that definition *IS *worthless.


----------



## Nostradamus

Hiip Hop is definitively no music, it's an illness, performed by mostly big-mouthed male youth using a misogynistic and violent language. Stupid crap. But this is my personal opinion, no scientific description.


----------



## Guy Bacos

For what it's worth, I didn't make any connection to racism, it's funny and I'm not going to hold back from laughing. Could be the person unhappy about it who have issues...


----------



## José Herring

Guy Bacos @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> For what it's worth, I didn't make any connection to racism, it's funny and I'm not going to hold back from laughing. Could be the person unhappy about it who have issues...




Guy Bacos saying I have issues..... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## madbulk

mverta @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> It's all music; everything is music; the fart that comes out of your ass is music and everyone's a musician and Beethoven is music and Boulez is musiceventhoughmygoddamn15month-oldcrieswhenhehearsitandsmileswhenhehearsMozart but that's just because music is subjective and tonality is transient and we're living in a glorious time of artistic nirvana. The End.



LOL.


----------



## dcoscina

I actually think Hip Hop CAN be a viable vehicle and there are some very talented song writers in this genre. It's certainly more polarized than other genres of music but I think one could do some really good work in this area.

That said, John Coltrane and jazz is something that resonates much more with me. but I played jazz in my youth and studied it at university. So I'm wee bit biased.


----------



## Guy Bacos

josejherring @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Guy Bacos @ Mon Dec 05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> For what it's worth, I didn't make any connection to racism, it's funny and I'm not going to hold back from laughing. Could be the person unhappy about it who have issues...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Guy Bacos saying I have issues..... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Click to expand...


Well the way you're overly reacting about this says something.... And I wasn't even pointing the finger at anyone specific, you seemed to have taken it personally right away.


----------



## Ed

Nostradamus @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Hiip Hop is definitively no music, it's an illness, performed by mostly big-mouthed male youth using a misogynistic and violent language. Stupid crap. But this is my personal opinion, no scientific description.



I know you put a smiley, but not all hip hop is like that and hip hop doesn't necessitate MCing or rapping at all and in the beginning didn't include that. Maybe however this also goes into what is poetry and what isn't, if you write a rhyme about yo bitch ass ex stealin yo money, is it poetry, or just crappy poetry? There are actually very talented Mc'ers out there.

No one should be comparing Jazz to Hip Hop anyway. The reason I like some dub step is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT to why I might like some Beethoven piece. i certainly don't think all music is subjectively good, within the rules some hip hop is better than others, but you have know what the rules are and what you're appreciating. Some people don't know what they are meant to appreciate, which is fine because some music I just don't get at all...


----------



## madbulk

That's all great. But take Jay's point, that just because it's all valid, and it's all art, or whatever language you wanna put here, it's not all equal. And your arguments fly out the window when you insist on absolute subjectivity.

Hey I love the Beatles, but they weren't Coltrane either. On plenty of levels their contribution is superior to his, they certainly had the greater impact on my life, but he's the greater musician, and it's not close.

And if you tell me Coltrane couldn't have written "Love Me Do" any easier than they could've blown over Giant Steps? I'll reach through this screen.


----------



## Andrew Christie

Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> lol Bad Romance by Lady Gaga...creative? Hard to write? I agree that the production side and the marketing side is a tuff egg to crack because you don't know what kids are going to buy these days... but as far as the writing?
> 
> 
> Andrew...
> ----Its 3 chords...
> 
> with her riding the tonic minor pretty much the whole verses and then VI, VII, i over and over for the chorus. Its a way common chord progression.
> 
> There is some variances, like i III VI in the verses buts its basically just home minor playing the whole time.
> 
> ----And the beat is Kick...Snare...Kick...Snare...Kick...Snare.
> 
> ----And finally the lyrics...Ra Ra Ram Ma Ma Ga Ga Oool la la want your bad romance.
> If you read the rest of the lyrics you'll hopefully see that they are just as bad as the one I just cited.
> The problem is kids are so ignorant that they actually think that they are the only ones who can see genius in crap lyrics. Lady Gaga wrote those lyrics to SOUND like they are a mystery waiting to be cracked....but there is nothing there.
> 
> The rest is where the art lies, in the production side and the engineering side.



Oh damn, I've been caught out, I'm really a deaf 10 year old.



> Great pop always sounds easy, and can be deconstructed in a paragraph.
> 
> Funny how much harder it is to come up with it in the first place though.



Agree


----------



## SergeD

Nostradamus @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Hiip Hop is definitively no music, it's an illness, performed by mostly big-mouthed male youth using a misogynistic and violent language. Stupid crap. But this is my personal opinion, no scientific description.



Unfortunately... It's sad to see that, like religions, the Hip hop culture transmits now the opposite message of the initial movement. we now see guys grabbing their nuts while saying "come on, come on". Reminds me the 80's blond curly hair rock bands emulating Zeppelin in some way.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hip_hop
"Tony Tone, a member of the pioneering rap group the Cold Crush Brothers, noted that "hip hop saved a lot of lives".[31] Hip hop culture became a way of dealing with the hardships of life as minorities within America, and an outlet to deal with violence and gang culture."

On a dance floor Hip hop is definitively music while Beethoveen is not. There are Hip hop songs that will overheat your body within five minutes. In my subjective opinion, this deserves to be called "Great music".


----------



## dinerdog

+1 Hip Hop is definitely music.


----------



## Dan Mott

*"I would listen to Eastwest Lurker, logic is the only winner in the real world and Eastwest Lurker has it"*

lol


----------



## Dan Mott

*"the fart that comes out of your ass is music"*


:mrgreen: 

Hahah. Nice one!


----------



## Dan Mott

Can I just say, though I'm young "I don't know what I'm talking about/I'm ignorant blah blah" :roll: 

If you are all true musicians then I do not see why we would all have to have this discussion. Complex/genre, or whatever, it's not about that and I do not think it ever was. Instead, music is about the feeling and emotion it gives us. Sounds corny, but this is why we have such variety in what we listen to and so many different people liking DIFFERENT sound, aswell as many people who cannot relate to some sounds and are affended by it. I absolutely love some of the most simple song writing around IMO and it does justice for me and because I'm enjoying it so much, I'm blinded by how complex it is, blah blah.

No one can say something is shit and claim it's a fact. I hate the FRIDAY song, but many people love it! I do not like Justen Bieber, but millions of girls love him and even GUYS. I completely despise Lady Gaga and her image, aswell as her songs, but shes the number one woman right now. So it just goes round in circles. If you are feeling like you are getting too old for music, then I'd say it's not your age, it's what you are listening to and you need to find something else. Plenty of endless choices. You just need to know where to find it.


----------



## sherief83

Time for lenny to contribute to the discussion...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=raSGRE7jrpA


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Dan-Jay @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Can I just say, though I'm young "I don't know what I'm talking about/I'm ignorant blah blah" :roll:
> 
> If you are all true musicians then I do not see why we would all have to have this discussion. Complex/genre, or whatever, it's not about that and I do not think it ever was. Instead, music is about the feeling and emotion it gives us. Sounds corny, but this is why we have such variety in what we listen to and we so many different people like DIFFERENT sound, aswell as many people who cannot relate to some sounds and are affended by it. I absolutely love some of the most simple song writing around IMO and it does justice for me and because I'm enjoying it so much, then I'm blinding by how complex it is, blah blah.
> 
> No one can say something is shit and claim it's a fact. I hate the FRIDAY song, but many people love it! I do not like Justen Bieber, but millions of girls love him and even GUYS. I completely despise Lady Gaga and her image, aswell as her songs, but shes the number one woman right now. So it just goes round in circles. If you are feeling like you are getting too old for music, then I'd just it's not your age, it's what you are listen to and you need to find something else. Plenty of endless choices. You just need to know where to find it.



Of course, you are right, no music is better than any other music, if you like it as well. If I listen to a three minute song on the radio and it touches me, the Beethoven 9th Symphony is not better music, because I like it as well.

A Picasso is not better than a finger painting you do or a picture in a color by the numbers book, if you like it as well. 

A McDonald's hamburger is just as good food as an aged Kobe beef steak, if you like it as well. 

Heidi Klum in not prettier than the cross-eyed girl with buck teeth in your neighborhood, if you like her looks as well. 

The president of the US is no more moral than Assad of Syria, if you like him as well. 

A 1970 Ford Pinto is just as good a car as a new BMW if you like it as well.

There are no standards or critical methods for assessing the quality of anything despite the fact the4y have existed for generations, there is only personal taste.

What a shame it has taken me so many years to understand this.


----------



## Dan Mott

Oh :D

I didn't think you'd agree Jay. o=< o=?


----------



## noiseboyuk

I really don't understand why it is so hard to accept that a critical analysis of music does not magically transform music from art into science. It's the same as all other art criticism. No-one can say that the Mona Lisa is the greatest painting of all time, and what a meaningless and foolish thing to say it would be. But art critics aren't reduced to saying "so you're saying that the Mona Lisa is as good as a 4 year old's stick man drawing" either.


----------



## Markus S

TheUnfinished @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Jeffrey Peterson @ Mon Dec 05 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mverta @ Sat Dec 03 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _Mike
> Big version
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Oh this is so good. This says it all.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Not really. It couldn't say less about music if it tried.
Click to expand...


Guys, I think you may have overseen the small printed stuff. It says "in western notation", I think what they want to say is that western notation does not get what the new music is about.


----------



## TheUnfinished

False dichotomies, logical fallacies, straw men...

Why is "reductio ad absurdum" often the first club taken out of the bag in these discussion? It should be the last resort and just undervalues everything that's being said.


----------



## EthanStoller

I came across the following quote last night, reading David Hadju's interview with the late blues legend David "Honeyboy" Edwards:
"The young musicians don't have their own style. No, they just play whatever they learned and get up there, playing fast. They're not thinking about it. They got no feeling to it, no sir....they're mostly clowning. *They're not playing no music*. They ain't got no feeling in there....I'll tell you, some guys can play so many chords it doesn't sound good. They're making too many to put in one place--you know what I mean? You take another guy with one chord--only one chord...One chord can kill a man dead. One chord and hold it there, you can kill a man dead."
I thought of this thread and the Coltrane graphic. I think there is a lot of wisdom in Edwards's quote. But I also notice that most of the musicians offering an opinion on this subject endorse a position which affirms the superiority of the music they've chosen to pursue.


----------



## Gusfmm

Dan-Jay @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> *"the fart that comes out of your ass is music"*
> 
> 
> :mrgreen:
> 
> Hahah. Nice one!



Ask Troels, he'd probably take you up and sample it. I'm thinking long sustains and trills may be an issue, so wonder how looped material would sound...


----------



## Gusfmm

TheUnfinished @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> False dichotomies, logical fallacies, straw men...
> 
> Why is "reductio ad absurdum" often the first club taken out of the bag in these discussion? It should be the last resort and just undervalues everything that's being said.



+100


----------



## Ed

Gusfmm @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> Ask Troels @ 8Dio, he'd probably take you up and sample it. I'm thinking long sustains and trills may be an issue, so wonder how looped material would sound...



They already did that, and urinating.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 05 said:


> Of course, you are right, no music is better than any other music, if you like it as well. If I listen to a three minute song on the radio and it touches me, the Beethoven 9th Symphony is not better music, because I like it as well.
> 
> A Picasso is not better than a finger painting you do or a picture in a color by the numbers book, if you like it as well.
> 
> A McDonald's hamburger is just as good food as an aged Kobe beef steak, if you like it as well.
> 
> Heidi Klum in not prettier than the cross-eyed girl with buck teeth in your neighborhood, if you like her looks as well.
> 
> The president of the US is no more moral than Assad of Syria, if you like him as well.
> 
> A 1970 Ford Pinto is just as good a car as a new BMW if you like it as well.
> 
> There are no standards or critical methods for assessing the quality of anything despite the fact the4y have existed for generations, there is only personal taste.
> 
> What a shame it has taken me so many years to understand this.



Dan I know your young so let me explain what Jay is obviously saying here. Obvious for some at least.
Some things are just not as good as others...REGARDLESS of whether you think it is better or not. 

Basically if you think a 1970 POS is just as good or better than a brand new BMW your going to get a lot of weird looks....that is exactly what is happening in this thread.



Markus S @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> Guys, I think you may have overseen the small printed stuff. It says "in western notation", I think what they want to say is that western notation does not get what the new music is about.



Sure.


----------



## jlb

I am reading this thread and it is most entertaining. I'm not contributing though, because it is ridiculous. Let's see if anyone even _Remembers_ the LiL Wayne 'I ate a bitch' or whatever it is in 50 years, like people remember the Coltrane.

Does the sampled fart that everyone is talking about have many dynamic layers?

Jlb


----------



## givemenoughrope

jlb @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> I am reading this thread and it is most entertaining. I'm not contributing though, because it is ridiculous. Let's see if anyone even _Remembers_ the LiL Wayne 'I ate a bitch' or whatever it is in 50 years, like people remember the Coltrane.
> 
> Does the sampled fart that everyone is talking about have many dynamic layers?
> 
> Jlb



For the millionth time, that's not the point. Anyone with literally half a brain can tell there is more going on in every way with Coltrane over Lil Wayne and the like, musically, emotionally, craft, etc and that one will outlast the other. The bs is in connecting the two. It's as ignorant as thinking all black people know each other.


----------



## jlb

I'm not getting dragged into this thread, but I think 'A Short History...' is great. It made me laugh. Thank you Mike Verta.

Jlb


----------



## José Herring

givemenoughrope @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> jlb @ Tue Dec 06 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am reading this thread and it is most entertaining. I'm not contributing though, because it is ridiculous. Let's see if anyone even _Remembers_ the LiL Wayne 'I ate a bitch' or whatever it is in 50 years, like people remember the Coltrane.
> 
> Does the sampled fart that everyone is talking about have many dynamic layers?
> 
> Jlb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the millionth time, that's not the point. Anyone with literally half a brain can tell there is more going on in every way with Coltrane over Lil Wayne and the like, musically, emotionally, craft, etc and that one will outlast the other. The bs is in connecting the two. It's as ignorant as thinking all black people know each other.
Click to expand...


Thank you!

It's amazing to me that some are so ignorant that they think Mike's little off handed comment isn't offensive to serious black musicians and way off base.


----------



## givemenoughrope

How about instead of worrying about Lil Wayne and lack melody in film scores we concentrate on the good stuff? Tenor players like Mark Turner, Bill McHenry, Chris Potter are part of that lineage of Coltrane, Rollins, and Ornette (even Warne Marsh if anyone cares about him...?). That Flying Lotus guy and Amon Tobin makes some interesting electronic music. It's anyones guess what they'll sound like 10 years from now. A few flicks are out now that feature actual melody in the score (or close to it); the new Cronenberg and Steve McQueen (not that Steve McQueen). There's good stuff out there everywhere. just turn off the tv (until the next Breaking Bad).


----------



## Dan Mott

No Jeff. He was saying that in the end, its all about personal tastes and that nothing is better than one another for a fact. You cannot compare car brands to music because obviously there are cars that are better than one another.... Because they are cars! Some have better steering/handling/air con/blah blah blah

In music, tastes are subjective. If I said that Rebecca Black has better songs than Mozart then so be it. Though if you were comparing them on technical terms, it would be different and I think that's what you are doing, judging be complication.


----------



## Saxer

musical taste is subjective. quality is not, even in music.

it's the same with food... some people like junk food. so they eat junk. their taste doesn't make it to something better.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

josejherring @ Tue Dec 06 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Tue Dec 06 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jlb @ Tue Dec 06 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I am reading this thread and it is most entertaining. I'm not contributing though, because it is ridiculous. Let's see if anyone even _Remembers_ the LiL Wayne 'I ate a bitch' or whatever it is in 50 years, like people remember the Coltrane.
> 
> Does the sampled fart that everyone is talking about have many dynamic layers?
> 
> Jlb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the millionth time, that's not the point. Anyone with literally half a brain can tell there is more going on in every way with Coltrane over Lil Wayne and the like, musically, emotionally, craft, etc and that one will outlast the other. The bs is in connecting the two. It's as ignorant as thinking all black people know each other.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Thank you!
> 
> It's amazing to me that some are so ignorant that they think Mike's little off handed comment isn't offensive to serious black musicians and way off base.
Click to expand...


I disagree respectfully. If one did the same thing with an innovative white guy, like Charles Ives and paired it with a poster of Vanilla Ice, that would be funny and inoffensive as well. I cannot think of a contemporary Jewish guy who is mega successful in music right now but if someone did a film version with Woody Allen and Adam Sandler, it would be making the same point and I would also find that funny and inoffensive as a Jewish guy. Music is not the only thing that has been dumbed down and is qualitatively less.


----------



## Gusfmm

Saxer @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> musical taste is subjective. quality is not, even in music.
> 
> it's the same with food... some people like junk food. so they eat junk. their taste doesn't make it to something better.



So, how do you exactly assess the quality of a Palestrina madrigal, and compare it against the quality of Schoenberg's Pierrot? Or maybe Mahler's seventh against Debussy's Clair de Lune, Emerson Lake and Palmer's Tarkus, or Bart Howard's Fly me to the Moon, or Lady Gaga's Bad Romance?

So how do you tell which portraits are better quality, a Renoir, or a Picasso, or maybe a Dali, or maybe da Vinci's La Gioconda?

Or maybe you like Armani's shirts better than CK's, or maybe Tommy Hilfiger's?

Music is an Art, not tooling nuts in a metalwork shop. Even talking in pseudo-quality terms, what is poor quality for me maybe acceptable quality for somebody else. Different standards, different points of view, different needs, different tastes. And we're beating a dead horse here.


----------



## givemenoughrope

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> I disagree respectfully. If one did the same thing with an innovative white guy, like Charles Ives and paired it with a poster of Vanilla Ice, that would be funny and inoffensive as well. I cannot think of a contemporary Jewish guy who is mega successful in music right now but if someone did a film version with Woody Allen and Adam Sandler, it would be making the same point and I would also find that funny and inoffensive as a Jewish guy. Music is not the only thing that has been dumbed down and is qualitatively less.



Respectfully, Jay, no one made a banner with Ives and VI. It would instantly be seen as a goof as opposed to Trane to Wayne which, although it's laughed at, is seen to encapsulate a/the truth. 

I would find the Allen/Sandler banner funny as it's in keeping with the former's comedic style. Comedians, fans and even Sandler would call bs on that, not that they'd take it seriously. It would be laughed off the stage...


----------



## EastWest Lurker

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree respectfully. If one did the same thing with an innovative white guy, like Charles Ives and paired it with a poster of Vanilla Ice, that would be funny and inoffensive as well. I cannot think of a contemporary Jewish guy who is mega successful in music right now but if someone did a film version with Woody Allen and Adam Sandler, it would be making the same point and I would also find that funny and inoffensive as a Jewish guy. Music is not the only thing that has been dumbed down and is qualitatively less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respectfully, Jay, no one made a banner with Ives and VI. It would instantly be seen as a goof as opposed to Trane to Wayne which, although it's laughed at, is seen to encapsulate a/the truth.
> 
> I would find the Allen/Sandler banner funny as it's in keeping with the former's comedic style. Comedians, fans and even Sandler would call bs on that, not that they'd take it seriously. It would be laughed off the stage...
Click to expand...


But the comparison is essentially the same truth, two important artists with two flavors of the month.

And Woody Allen, though he made silly films early on, always made intelligent witty films with intelligent dialog whereas Adam pees in a pool and generally acts like a perpetual 15 year old u=in his movies and this now passes for wit. Sad because he has made a couple of films where more was asked of him, like Punch Drunk Love, and he was quite good.

OK, I gotta get back to work.

Mike, David and David, Jeffrey, et al, keep fighting the good fight and kudos for not accepting the anti-intellectual premise that there are no critical standards, only personal taste.


----------



## José Herring

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree respectfully. If one did the same thing with an innovative white guy, like Charles Ives and paired it with a poster of Vanilla Ice, that would be funny and inoffensive as well. I cannot think of a contemporary Jewish guy who is mega successful in music right now but if someone did a film version with Woody Allen and Adam Sandler, it would be making the same point and I would also find that funny and inoffensive as a Jewish guy. Music is not the only thing that has been dumbed down and is qualitatively less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respectfully, Jay, no one made a banner with Ives and VI. It would instantly be seen as a goof as opposed to Trane to Wayne which, although it's laughed at, is seen to encapsulate a/the truth.
Click to expand...


At least one person is getting it.

@ Jay, I appreciate your respect, but I'm getting tired of explaining it. I'll try to explain it one more time. 

Nobody would even think that Charles Ives and Vanilla Ice would belong under a caption "History of White Music." why, because for anybody with half a brain those two wouldn't even be mildly connected. Nobody would even think that a comparison of Charles Ives to Vanilla Ice would be funny. It would be considered so ridiculous that it wouldn't even be entertaining. 

But,.... some people are finding some sort of truth in comparing John Coltrane to Lil'Wayne. Even comparing Jazz to Rap. Because both artist are black, the dim witted unexacting mind categorizes it as "black musicians" and doesn't even realize that the comparison doesn't make any sense. So the "joke" only really makes sense on a racist level. Because there certainly isn't any truth to it. It's a fact that Jazz and Hip-Hop have nothing to do with each other. It's a fact that there are plenty of Jazz musicians alive today that represent the true legacy of guys like John Coltrane. And, it's a fact that it's offensive to compare some gansta' thug to a legend like John Coltrane.

The reason you can't make the analogy work with Jewish musicians is because in your mind you can't make the connection. Because, a similar statement involving Jewish musicians would be considered too much of a stretch in your mind. It would be like comparing Mahler to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUWyWmD0218 and thinking that a comparison of Mahler to Weird Al Yankovich in any way represented a "history of Jewish music" because after all they're both "jewish" :roll: . It doesn't represent the history of Jewish music or musicians any more than comparing Coltrane to a thug parody.

edit: Oh, it's a racist musical statement because it relies on race for it's humor. It's pretty simple. Not saying that it's evil, but it's certainly degrading along racial lines. It's also something I've had to fight for a long time. This perception of "black" music.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

josejherring @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree respectfully. If one did the same thing with an innovative white guy, like Charles Ives and paired it with a poster of Vanilla Ice, that would be funny and inoffensive as well. I cannot think of a contemporary Jewish guy who is mega successful in music right now but if someone did a film version with Woody Allen and Adam Sandler, it would be making the same point and I would also find that funny and inoffensive as a Jewish guy. Music is not the only thing that has been dumbed down and is qualitatively less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respectfully, Jay, no one made a banner with Ives and VI. It would instantly be seen as a goof as opposed to Trane to Wayne which, although it's laughed at, is seen to encapsulate a/the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At least one person is getting it.
> 
> @ Jay, I appreciate your respect, but I'm getting tired of explaining it. I'll try to explain it one more time.
> 
> Nobody would even think that Charles Ives and Vanilla Ice would belong under a caption "History of White Music." why, because for anybody with half a brain those two wouldn't even be mildly connected. Nobody would even think that a comparison of Charles Ives to Vanilla Ice would be funny. It would be considered so ridiculous that it wouldn't even be entertaining.
> 
> But,.... some people are finding some sort of truth in comparing John Coltrane to Lil'Wayne. Even comparing Jazz to Rap. Because both artist are black, the dim witted unexacting mind categorizes it as "black musicians" and doesn't even realize that the comparison doesn't make any sense. So the "joke" only really makes sense on a racist level. Because there certainly isn't any truth to it. It's a fact that Jazz and Hip-Hop have nothing to do with each other. It's a fact that there are plenty of Jazz musicians alive today that represent the true legacy of guys like John Coltrane. And, it's a fact that it's offensive to compare some gansta' thug to a legend like John Coltrane.
> 
> The reason you can't make the analogy work with Jewish musicians is because in your mind you can't make the connection. Because, a similar statement involving Jewish musicians would be considered too much of a stretch in your mind. It would be like comparing Mahler to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUWyWmD0218 and thinking that a comparison of Mahler to Weird Al Yankovich in any way represented a "history of Jewish music" because after all they're both "jewish" :roll: . It doesn't represent the history of Jewish music or musicians any more than comparing Coltrane to a thug parody.
Click to expand...


Sorry Jose', I am still not buying it because Al is a satirist, and by design it is not meant to be taken seriously. However, sadly, some people DO take both Lil'Wayne and yes, even Vanilla Ice back in the day seriously.

But fine:let's make a History of White Music and put Beethoven with Eminem if you like, because there are probably, god help us, some here who are going to argue they are both equally great, just different and a matter of taste.


----------



## SvK

Dscocina

Why not take the complex orchestral harmonic structures of yesterday and combine with the slick percussion beds / sounds of tomorrow?

best,
SvK


----------



## José Herring

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> josejherring @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I disagree respectfully. If one did the same thing with an innovative white guy, like Charles Ives and paired it with a poster of Vanilla Ice, that would be funny and inoffensive as well. I cannot think of a contemporary Jewish guy who is mega successful in music right now but if someone did a film version with Woody Allen and Adam Sandler, it would be making the same point and I would also find that funny and inoffensive as a Jewish guy. Music is not the only thing that has been dumbed down and is qualitatively less.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Respectfully, Jay, no one made a banner with Ives and VI. It would instantly be seen as a goof as opposed to Trane to Wayne which, although it's laughed at, is seen to encapsulate a/the truth.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> At least one person is getting it.
> 
> @ Jay, I appreciate your respect, but I'm getting tired of explaining it. I'll try to explain it one more time.
> 
> Nobody would even think that Charles Ives and Vanilla Ice would belong under a caption "History of White Music." why, because for anybody with half a brain those two wouldn't even be mildly connected. Nobody would even think that a comparison of Charles Ives to Vanilla Ice would be funny. It would be considered so ridiculous that it wouldn't even be entertaining.
> 
> But,.... some people are finding some sort of truth in comparing John Coltrane to Lil'Wayne. Even comparing Jazz to Rap. Because both artist are black, the dim witted unexacting mind categorizes it as "black musicians" and doesn't even realize that the comparison doesn't make any sense. So the "joke" only really makes sense on a racist level. Because there certainly isn't any truth to it. It's a fact that Jazz and Hip-Hop have nothing to do with each other. It's a fact that there are plenty of Jazz musicians alive today that represent the true legacy of guys like John Coltrane. And, it's a fact that it's offensive to compare some gansta' thug to a legend like John Coltrane.
> 
> The reason you can't make the analogy work with Jewish musicians is because in your mind you can't make the connection. Because, a similar statement involving Jewish musicians would be considered too much of a stretch in your mind. It would be like comparing Mahler to this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUWyWmD0218 and thinking that a comparison of Mahler to Weird Al Yankovich in any way represented a "history of Jewish music" because after all they're both "jewish" :roll: . It doesn't represent the history of Jewish music or musicians any more than comparing Coltrane to a thug parody.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry Jose', I am still not buying it because Al is a satirist, and by design it is not meant to be taken seriously. However, sadly, some people DO take both Lil'Wayne and yes, even Vanilla Ice back in the day seriously.
> 
> But fine:let's make a History of White Music and put Beethoven with Eminem if you like, because there are probably, god help us, some here who are going to argue they are both equally great, just different and a matter of taste.
Click to expand...


You are combining two different arguments. I'm not saying that they are both equally great. That's a separate aesthetic argument that I won't wade into. I'm saying Mike's post is something that would receive great enthusiastic approval as truth on a white supremacist website. Why, because a race based joke is the only thing that makes the entire post make sense. And, I will repeat for the last time if the post had read "a history of white music" comparing Beethoven to Eminem then it wouldn't have been funny or made much sense. It equally isn't funny and equally doesn't make sense involving black musicians. It's a joke in poor taste and to me is pretty offensive.


----------



## jb

Mostly a lurker here, but just thought I'd join in the fun.

Didn't read through all of the posts so I am not sure whether it has been said or not, but....

I see threads like this on various production/composition forums pretty often and more often than not they are by people who are creating sub par productions. No offense to the OP, I do not know him nor do I know his work, but I would be willing to bet his stuff is no where near the level of the people in the field who are killing it; and there are lots of those people. 

I am sure everyone's tastes are different but can people really say that Invincible by 2sfh was not an awesome album? The new Skyrim ost, various other OSTS...There are people on this board who post (and even in this thread) who are doing exciting, interesting and innovative things musically.

The whole argument that "the music industry has no places for my talents," or the one that the industry has been so dumbed down that it is below thy self to write that sort of "garbage," is frankly laughable. If hip-hop is so easy to write, then do it; write a track that sounds comparable to Eminem or Wiz. The truth is there is more to music now a days than just writing music, there is art in the recording, engineering and mastering.

Look within for improvement; if you are not having fun don't do it. Don't blame the industry if there is no place for your tunes; if you are partial to mozart and bach and you could really write and produce stuff like mozart and bach you would have a place in the industry.

Peace.


----------



## givemenoughrope

And as an awkward, lilly-white (albeit of the goy variety) comedy fan/film buff, I'm offended that someone had to explain the history of Woody Allen to me. And then contrast him with Adam Sandler. o/~


SvK, 
totally agree. I've been think a lot about that approach lately. Seems rather untouched...?


----------



## José Herring

In defense of the original poster, dcoscina, the argument has gone way beyond I think what he originally intended. What he intended was that his style of music that he likes isn't as popular as it once was and he's having trouble finding his place. I can relate. I've had to complete revamp myself in order to stay current and it's not easy. If you heard my stuff from 10 years ago compared to today you wouldn't even recognize it as coming from the same me.

Dave does have his production shortcomings, imo, not because he isn't capable, but as so many of us more classically trained composers think production value is beneath serious consideration. After all, recording and engineering aren't music. I've struggled for the last 5 years to get over that and have finally come out at the other end of it. That if doing music with computers is your primary musical outlet, then you have to master it on its own terms. It's the only way that we as trained artist are going to beat those untrained artist that have mastered the art of recording and engineering and programming. Because at the end of the day, you're ending up on some recorded medium and if it doesn't sound good, then it doesn't matter what theory or harmony or flight of melodic construction you've applied in your composition. It will sound like crap recorded especially if you don't have real people, but even then I've heard a lot of pretty decent compositions recorded by real players that didn't stand up because of the recording quality. In this day and age, you have to have it all. Production value is probably more important than compositional value, but that would be short changing it a bit. It would be more accurate to say that if the production value isn't there nobody will even bother to care about the compositional value.

So in this long thread, if I had any advice to give dcosina, it would be to not worry too much about the kind of music. Today there is every kind of music out there. There really is. Worry about the production value of your music. Every idea has to be flushed out to its fullest. Every sample programmed to its most musical capability. There's nothing wrong with dcosina's music. I can name about 500 things wrong with the final production of his music. And, perhaps that he doesn't fully flush out his ideas to their maximum potential. Mostly like he kind of gives up and says to himself, well it's good enough.

I feel that given his understanding and training that if he took the time to really finish what he did and make sure that the entire package was professionally done, he would be a lot less frustrated and more successful than he is. But, I could say that about anybody really.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

[quote="josejherring @ Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:29 am"
[/quote]


You are combining two different arguments. I'm not saying that they are both equally great. That's a separate aesthetic argument that I won't wade into. I'm saying Mike's post is something that would receive great enthusiastic approval as truth on a white supremacist website. Why, because a race based joke is the only thing that makes the entire post make sense. And, I will repeat for the last time if the post had read "a history of white music" comparing Beethoven to Eminem then it wouldn't have been funny or made much sense. It equally isn't funny and equally doesn't make sense involving black musicians. It's a joke in poor taste and to me is pretty offensive.[/quote]

I think comparing Beethoven to Eminem is equally funny and equally makes sense. Racists can turn absolutely anything with a person of another race into something hateful so that is not a litmus test IMHO.

BTW, I am going to send a screenshot of Mike's poster to a couple of musician friends of mine who are African-American for their reaction and I will bet you a nice dinner that they laugh and are not offended. Deal?


----------



## KEnK

josejherring @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> ... some people are finding some sort of truth in comparing John Coltrane to Lil'Wayne. Even comparing Jazz to Rap. Because both artist are black, the dim witted unexacting mind categorizes it as "black musicians" and doesn't even realize that the comparison doesn't make any sense. So the "joke" only really makes sense on a racist level. Because there certainly isn't any truth to it. It's a fact that Jazz and Hip-Hop have nothing to do with each other. It's a fact that there are plenty of Jazz musicians alive today that represent the true legacy of guys like John Coltrane. And, it's a fact that it's offensive to compare some gansta' thug to a legend like John Coltrane.


I thought I left this argument a few days ago, but I have to comment here.

Jose- You're making 2 different arguments.
One about racism disguised as "race humor", 
the other about "African American Music History".

I'll leave the racism question for now and address 
"It's a fact that Jazz and Hip-Hop have nothing to do with each other."

Simply, most serious students of African American Music History see it as 
beginning w/ Slavery and continuing through to the present.
The incredibly loud thumping from a car that shakes my house from 100 yards away
is related not only to Coltrane, but also to Duke Ellington and Jelly Roll Morton,
and also to those Nameless Historical Figures who played music in Congo Square in the 19th century. 
It's all a part of the African Diaspora. 
A continuous Musical Response to an African Holocaust.

These 2 Musics that you insist "have nothing to do with each other," intertwine and continue to nourish each other.

Here in Oakland Ca., it's not at all unusual for a band to play a Coltrane or Wayne Shorter piece, 
followed some Funk-Jazz, followed by a Gut-Bucket Traditional Blues, 
and then have a Rapper sit in.

I've personally done this all in same set. 
There are many popular local bands who specialize in exactly this amalgam. 

Another case in point is the Music of Steve Coleman, 
especially what he was doing in the 90's.
Here's a guy who's music has all the Mathematical Sophistication of Anthony Braxton,
combining it w/ a brand new Poly-Metric approach of the singular genius Marvin "Smitty" Smith, and sometimes putting it in a "Rap Context". 

It's all together in One Pot, related because the Music is Part of the Same Tree.

See what Mr. Smith has to say-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OJc8YoCRLE&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OJc8YoC ... re=related)

k


----------



## José Herring

Jeez, I want to leave this argument.

Just because two styles of music arise and then influence eachother doesn't mean that they arose from the same sources. You can't say that Ravel came from the same source as blues just because Ravel used the blues scale in one of his piano concertos. Influenced by doesn't mean the same as arose from.

That's all I'll say.


----------



## José Herring

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> [quote="josejherring @ Wed Dec 07, 2011 9:29 am"




You are combining two different arguments. I'm not saying that they are both equally great. That's a separate aesthetic argument that I won't wade into. I'm saying Mike's post is something that would receive great enthusiastic approval as truth on a white supremacist website. Why, because a race based joke is the only thing that makes the entire post make sense. And, I will repeat for the last time if the post had read "a history of white music" comparing Beethoven to Eminem then it wouldn't have been funny or made much sense. It equally isn't funny and equally doesn't make sense involving black musicians. It's a joke in poor taste and to me is pretty offensive.[/quote]

I think comparing Beethoven to Eminem is equally funny and equally makes sense. Racists can turn absolutely anything with a person of another race into something hateful so that is not a litmus test IMHO.

BTW, I am going to send a screenshot of Mike's poster to a couple of musician friends of mine who are African-American for their reaction and I will bet you a nice dinner that they laugh and are not offended. Deal?[/quote]

They'll laugh out of politeness to you. But, if they are serous jazzers they'll be offended. I know were Winton M. lives. I can probably through a few connection get his private email. Why don't you send it to him and see how he takes it. I can a sure you he won't take it well.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Just because two styles are popular in the same neighborhood or played at the same gig doesn't mean that one is derived from the other. I can pull a recipe from The Joy of Cooking and then toss some In n Out fries on the side too. Steve Coleman and some other jazz artists have rappers in large part to seem relevant. It's odd; tacked on. 

And Jay, just b/c a black musician agrees with this doesn't make them right. Socially, these two kinds of music may come from the same place (although for the most part, they really do not; one is civil rights era, the other during Reagan/War on Drugs, etc.) but there is no musical thread that connects Jazz to Hip Hop except a backbeat. Show us otherwise. Show us where Impressions turns into Rapper's Delight on staff paper and we'll be wrong. 

KenK, you should read before posting...or don't post.


----------



## KEnK

josejherring @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Jeez, I want to leave this argument.
> 
> Just because two styles of music arise and then influence eachother doesn't mean that they arose from the same sources. You can't say that Ravel came from the same source as blues just because Ravel used the blues scale in one of his piano concertos. Influenced by doesn't mean the same as arose from.
> 
> That's all I'll say.


Here's the thing Jose,

I haven't seen anyone say that Rap came from Jazz.
Personally, I've said, "they are related".

Your point about French Impressionism and Blues or Bluegrass,
does not make the relationship between 2 forms of 20th century Black American Music
null and void.

Both forms are part of a continuing evolution of a Music that always reached into and absorbed new ideas. and is redefined by new ideas.

Personally, (and this goes back to the 1st thing I said here)
I think because of the tools (computers and sampled loops)
Rap (and other looped computer music) has become a Music not played by Musicians.
And therefore it's evolution has been stifled.

And that is actually the point of the so called "Racist Banner".

k


----------



## EastWest Lurker

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Just because two styles are popular in the same neighborhood or played at the same gig doesn't mean that one is derived from the other. I can pull a recipe from The Joy of Cooking and then toss some In n Out fries on the side too. Steve Coleman and some other jazz artists have rappers in large part to seem relevant. It's odd; tacked on.
> 
> And Jay, just b/c a black musician agrees with this doesn't make them right. Socially, these two kinds of music may come from the same place (although for the most part, they really do not; one is civil rights era, the other during Reagan/War on Drugs, etc.) but there is no musical thread that connects Jazz to Hip Hop except a backbeat. Show us otherwise. Show us where Impressions turns into Rapper's Delight on staff paper and we'll be wrong.
> 
> KenK, you should read before posting...or don't post.



Of course, I don't expect all black musicians to see things the same way anymore than all white musicians do. I am only pointing out that this was not necessarily across the board offensive to blacks just because my friend Jose' was offended. He cannot speak for all blacks as I cannot speak for all whites or even all Jews. I know a lot of Jews who if someone says anything at all critical of Israel start calling that person an anti-Semite, which they may or may not be.

Bottom line is I don't throw the words racism or anti-Semtism around lightly. And it is simply a fact that whatever their roots, both jazz and hip/hop rap were brought into the culture largely by African-Americans and most jazz musicians, black or white, see it as artistically a step down.

Obviously I am having a tough time with this one particular cue I am on as I should not be spending time posting here


----------



## givemenoughrope

Ok, but a step down from what? Mid-60s Miles, Little Richard, Gil Scott Heron? Hip hop is just another form of rock music. It's not going for sophistication as much as directness. This is another 'we're all doomed' stance to say otherwise.


----------



## KEnK

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Just because two styles are popular in the same neighborhood or played at the same gig doesn't mean that one is derived from the other. I can pull a recipe from The Joy of Cooking and then toss some In n Out fries on the side too. Steve Coleman and some other jazz artists have rappers in large part to seem relevant. It's odd; tacked on.
> 
> And Jay, just b/c a black musician agrees with this doesn't make them right. Socially, these two kinds of music may come from the same place (although for the most part, they really do not; one is civil rights era, the other during Reagan/War on Drugs, etc.) but there is no musical thread that connects Jazz to Hip Hop except a backbeat. Show us otherwise. Show us where Impressions turns into Rapper's Delight on staff paper and we'll be wrong.
> 
> KenK, you should read before posting...or don't post.


Speaking of reading before posting-
I never said one is derived from the other, not once.

Your missing link between Jazz and Hip Hop is stuff like James Brown, Sly Stone,
and what Miles was doing in the 70's.

And I don't agree w/ your assessment of Steve Coleman's music.

Seems to me you guys arguing that these Musics are completely unrelated are not aware of the History.

Rap didn't come out of a vacumm.

p.s. Rock Music is also "Black Music"


----------



## givemenoughrope

KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Speaking of reading before posting-
> I never said one is derived from the other, not once.



The banner you are defending says as much. 



KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Speaking of reading before posting-.....
> 
> Your missing link between Jazz and Hip Hop is stuff like James Brown, Sly Stone,
> and what Miles was doing in the 70's.





givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> there is no musical thread that connects Jazz to Hip Hop except a backbeat.





KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> And I don't agree w/ your assessment of Steve Coleman's music.
> 
> Seems to me you guys arguing that these Musics are completely unrelated are not aware of the History.
> 
> Rap didn't come out of a vacumm.





givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Show us where Impressions turns into Rapper's Delight on staff paper....



Dude, READ before you post! I give up. have fun hating music guys.


----------



## gamalataki

Jose, if you send that picture to Wynton, he's going to ask why he's not in the 2008 picture, where he belongs.


----------



## KEnK

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Speaking of reading before posting-
> I never said one is derived from the other, not once.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The banner you are defending says as much.
> 
> 
> 
> Dude, READ before you post! I give up. have fun hating music guys.
Click to expand...


Pretty amazing accusation coming from someone who completely ignores what I'm saying.

I'm not even talking about the banner. o=< 

You never heard a James Brown Sample in Hip Hop?
You don't hear that Miles was imitating JB and Sly Stone?

Musical evolution doesn't fit all nice and tidy like in your iTunes genre column.


----------



## germancomponist

I have not read all the posts here, but I remember a demo from a VI member who wrote a piece for a "gun-library".... )))

I think I had laughed 10 minutes or so...... .


----------



## givemenoughrope

KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> You never heard a James Brown Sample in Hip Hop?
> You don't hear that Miles was imitating JB and Sly Stone?
> 
> Musical evolution doesn't fit all nice and tidy like in your iTunes genre column.



Wow, you ARE a Jazz musician. If you read you'd see that I pointed that out already (Miles copping Sly and JB, ie a backbeat). It's such banal connection that it's barely worth mentioning. 

Still waiting for you to tell us the point, that moment that someone put down a horn and started rapping (hint: It's Gil Scott-Heron and it's not a musical evolution at all).

Go work on your turnarounds, bright eyes. Total eclipse of the thread. 

/\~O


----------



## Ed

KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> You never heard a James Brown Sample in Hip Hop?



How is that at all relevant?

Hip Hop is completely unrelated to Jazz except that they are both music and as givemenoughrope said they both have a backbeat... electronic music sometimes also samples classical pieces but doesnt make it related to classical music either. 

*The origins of both are totally different. *


----------



## KEnK

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> You never heard a James Brown Sample in Hip Hop?
> You don't hear that Miles was imitating JB and Sly Stone?
> 
> Musical evolution doesn't fit all nice and tidy like in your iTunes genre column.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wow, you ARE a Jazz musician. If you read you'd see that I pointed that out already (Miles copping Sly and JB, ie a backbeat). It's such banal connection that it's barely worth mentioning.
> 
> Still waiting for you to tell us the point, that moment that someone put down a horn and started rapping (hint: It's Gil Scott-Heron and it's not a musical evolution at all).
> 
> Go work on your turnarounds, bright eyes. Total eclipse of the thread.
> 
> /\~O
Click to expand...

Hey givemenoughrope-

Thanks for demonstrating your absolute lack of Music History.
Never heard of the Beat Poets in the 50's?
The idea of Spoken Word over Music is old old old. As in centuries.
It didn't just magically show up in the late 70's


----------



## José Herring

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just because two styles are popular in the same neighborhood or played at the same gig doesn't mean that one is derived from the other. I can pull a recipe from The Joy of Cooking and then toss some In n Out fries on the side too. Steve Coleman and some other jazz artists have rappers in large part to seem relevant. It's odd; tacked on.
> 
> And Jay, just b/c a black musician agrees with this doesn't make them right. Socially, these two kinds of music may come from the same place (although for the most part, they really do not; one is civil rights era, the other during Reagan/War on Drugs, etc.) but there is no musical thread that connects Jazz to Hip Hop except a backbeat. Show us otherwise. Show us where Impressions turns into Rapper's Delight on staff paper and we'll be wrong.
> 
> KenK, you should read before posting...or don't post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Of course, I don't expect all black musicians to see things the same way anymore than all white musicians do. I am only pointing out that this was not necessarily across the board offensive to blacks just because my friend Jose' was offended. He cannot speak for all blacks as I cannot speak for all whites or even all Jews. I know a lot of Jews who if someone says anything at all critical of Israel start calling that person an anti-Semite, which they may or may not be.
> 
> Bottom line is I don't throw the words racism or anti-Semtism around lightly. And it is simply a fact that whatever their roots, both jazz and hip/hop rap were brought into the culture largely by African-Americans and most jazz musicians, black or white, see it as artistically a step down.
> 
> Obviously I am having a tough time with this one particular cue I am on as I should not be spending time posting here
Click to expand...


I don't throw the word racism around lightly either. In all the time that you've know me in person and on this forum, I've never claimed racism. It's usually the farthest thing from my mind. And, know I never claimed that all black people will be offended. But, some and I'm one of them.


----------



## givemenoughrope

KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Hey givemenoughrope-
> 
> Thanks for demonstrating your absolute lack of Music History.
> Never heard of the Beat Poets in the 50's?
> The idea of Spoken Word over Music is old old old. As in centuries.
> It didn't just magically show up in the late 70's



Right, what's your point? Now you're going to blame Lil Wayne on Ginsberg, Kerouac and Burroughs. Good one. Neal Cassady made 'Beats' after all. 

Go look up Gil Scott, early dancehall like Yellowman or Tenor Saw, Grandmaster Flash, etc. it's great, pivotal stuff but it's not jazz. not even close. The spirit of it? Sure. The mechanics? No.


----------



## KEnK

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> Go look up Gil Scott, early dancehall like Yellowman or Tenor Saw, Grandmaster Flash, etc. it's great, pivotal stuff but it's not jazz. not even close. The spirit of it? Sure. The mechanics? No.


You're getting closer...
One or two more steps and you're there. :mrgreen:


----------



## givemenoughrope

??

Is this a joke? Why don't explain the rest to me...?


----------



## KEnK

givemenoughrope @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> ??
> 
> Is this a joke? Why don't explain the rest to me...?


I thought I did when I said this on the last page:

_Simply, most serious students of African American Music History see it as
beginning w/ Slavery and continuing through to the present.
The incredibly loud thumping from a car that shakes my house from 100 yards away
is related not only to Coltrane, but also to Duke Ellington and Jelly Roll Morton,
and also to those Nameless Historical Figures who played music in Congo Square in the 19th century.
It's all a part of the African Diaspora.
A continuous Musical Response to an African Holocaust._

All I'm saying is that they _relate_, not that Rap came directly from Jazz.
I've never said or thought that.

African American Music and Culture is a Gigantic thing that has seeped into every part of American Culture, and a lot of European Culture.

Even the Skin-head Hate-Punk Bands are playing "Black Music."
Because Rock is "Black Music".

The most extreme Red-neck Hillbilly bands are also influenced by Black Musicians.
You can't have Rock or Country that's devoid of African American Music.
It's like the Air here.

That's why I don't see Rap and Jazz as being separate entities.
They're part of the same tree.


----------



## givemenoughrope

thanks for that. really.


----------



## maraskandi

Music is all one interconnected mass of sound really, music on stringed instruments that sounds just like blues was being played in China in the 1400s on. Also, the earliest known instruments were flutes made of vulture bones, split, hollowed out and then stuck back together again. These flutes are pentatonic. They are 30,000 years old, so, there's more to things than our narrow imagination of a history only a couple thousands of years old tells us.


----------



## synergy543

So after 30,000 years of history....music suddenly devolves into the most elementary forms both in pop and film music? Why? This change may be part of what the OP was disliking about the direction of the film industry. And also what Mike V was commenting on (rather than dissing our black colleagues).

Folks, if you haven't noticed, many things have changed in recent years towards uber-simplfication and generally rather low production values. Both in pop and film music. Its not just a matter of personal taste, its fact.


----------



## Andrew Christie

In another 30,000 years, none of this will fucking matter.

THE END.


----------



## synergy543

Yeah, we'll all be too old for this stuff!


----------



## choc0thrax

In another 30,000 years this will actually all be extremely important. When I'm coasting through the outer reaches of space as a cosmic vagabond, trying to avoid trade federation tariffs I'm going to have to rely heavily on music to keep me entertained.


----------



## Andrew Christie

HAHA!


----------



## Ed

KEnK @ Wed Dec 07 said:


> All I'm saying is that they _relate_, not that Rap came directly from Jazz.
> I've never said or thought that..



In that sense ALL music "relates" so.....



> Because Rock is "Black Music".



I wonder how far rock music as to change before you think it no longer makes sense to continue calling it "black music".


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

SvK @ 7/12/2011 said:


> Dscocina
> 
> Why not take the complex orchestral harmonic structures of yesterday and combine with the slick percussion beds / sounds of tomorrow?



Because the sauce would be too rich?


----------



## Guy Bacos

Ned Bouhalassa @ Thu Dec 08 said:


> SvK @ 7/12/2011 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Dscocina
> 
> Why not take the complex orchestral harmonic structures of yesterday and combine with the slick percussion beds / sounds of tomorrow?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Because the sauce would be too rich?
Click to expand...



Don't agree. It is to any one of us to come up with a unique language. Gershwin was a prime example of that, however it took a lot a genius , but he did it, combined the sophistication of the past with the latest trend of his time.


----------



## clarkcontrol

Whatever you're thinking of has already been tried. 

Plus I'm one of those who believe that slick percussion beds are already passé.


----------



## dcoscina

I'm just not down with percussion beds because they take away the emphasis on melody, harmony and orchestration. To me, and this is just me, it's lazy, at least the way I do it. And I would much rather work on those other aspects rather than spend time making a rhythm track slicks. Like I said, that's just me. I'm not passing judgement on those who can do this well. I just can't and don't feel the need to develop skills in this dept. I need all the help I can get on large forms and structure!


----------



## poseur

deleted


----------



## Arbee

Phew, this is a long thread and a great read. I haven't had time to read the whole thread yet, but as someone who left music 20 years ago (partly for some similar reasons as the OP) and has just reignited his love of composing, I have a few thoughts and observations.

1 The art of music and the craft of music are complementary but different.

2 All great composers are remembered for the very best of their work and not everything they write is great. Time seems to wash away the lesser works and leave us mere mortals with the impression that everything they ever wrote was a masterpiece.

3 For me, the canvas of music is silence - that simple.

4 Great art of any mainstream type (as opposed to the more abstract) seduces the largest audience with a sense of the familiar then takes them somewhere else.

5 Most people who earn a living in the "real world" would kill for the ability to do what we do. Those who breath music like oxygen frequently forget this and take their skill and talent so much for granted.

6 Audiences are made of such a variety of people who are attracted to so many different types of music for so many different reasons, there is an audience somewhere for most music. Some music is successful commercially purely because of celebrity - so what?

7 The opportunity to contribute to the emotive power of flim and music together is a great privilege. I love John Williams' work but my favourite movie theme of all time is "On Golden Pond" (and not forgetting the other Dave Grusin films e.g. The Firm)

8 I really like those (OK, rare) times when I hear a new commercial song on the radio and can distinctly hear someone very musical coming through at me. It gives me great hope for the future.

9 Every time there are new tools, there are new ways of composing. We should celebrate the opportunities and freedoms this VI world provides us.

Anyway, just my two cents worth..... o[])


----------



## José Herring

poseur @ Thu Dec 08 said:


> deleted



Why?

I read this post yesterday it was a great and inspiring post.


----------



## poseur

josejherring @ Fri Dec 09 said:


> poseur @ Thu Dec 08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> deleted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why?
> 
> I read this post yesterday it was a great and inspiring post.
Click to expand...


thanks, josé.
i mostly feel pointless & out-of-place, here;
that's why i post so little.
i think that my personal focus is maybe just too different from the majority of posters:
not all, of course..... but, most.

feels like, for example:
pissing in the wind, tilting at windmills, chasing ghosts, etc.

it's all good, anyways.....
there's still so much life-to-be-lived & music-to-make, ¿right?
!!!


----------



## Ed

dcoscina @ Thu Dec 08 said:


> To me, and this is just me, it's lazy, *at least the way I do it*.



lol?


----------



## Markus S

poseur @ Fri Dec 09 said:


> josejherring @ Fri Dec 09 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> poseur @ Thu Dec 08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> deleted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i mostly feel pointless & out-of-place, here;
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


You are not, please stay and keep posting.


----------



## poseur

Markus S @ Fri Dec 09 said:


> poseur @ Fri Dec 09 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> josejherring @ Fri Dec 09 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> poseur @ Thu Dec 08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> deleted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i mostly feel pointless & out-of-place, here;
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> You are not, please stay and keep posting.
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...


thanks, m;
i wasn't fishing for attention, here.....
just speaking my mind w/actual sincerity.


----------



## José Herring

poseur @ Fri Dec 09 said:


> josejherring @ Fri Dec 09 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> poseur @ Thu Dec 08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> deleted
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Why?
> 
> I read this post yesterday it was a great and inspiring post.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> thanks, josé.
> i mostly feel pointless & out-of-place, here;
> that's why i post so little.
> i think that my personal focus is maybe just too different from the majority of posters:
> not all, of course..... but, most.
> 
> feels like, for example:
> pissing in the wind, tilting at windmills, chasing ghosts, etc.
> 
> it's all good, anyways.....
> there's still so much life-to-be-lived & music-to-make, ¿right?
> !!!
Click to expand...


Not to sound too melodramatic, but a lot of what you say reminds me of why I started composing in the first place.

Also, a lot of us feel out of place here.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

I swing both ways. 

And hope that the members of the Salon des Refusés will stick around, and share their experience. It takes all kinds, even gifted, musical explorers of the human condition, to make this place special.


----------



## choc0thrax

Oh come on, no one's leaving. We've played this tired game a million times before with Jose, Dave and Asher. ^>|


----------



## poseur

choc0thrax @ Fri Dec 09 said:


> Oh come on, no one's leaving. We've played this tired game a million times before with Jose, Dave and Asher. ^>|



yup, i did not say nor imply that i was "leaving".....
i simply don't spend enough time, here, to leave.
not fishing, not looking for more drama:
i just deleted a post.
simple, thanks.


----------



## synergy543

Poseur, as your post was mostly directed at me, I feel bad I didn't reply earlier. I didn't mean any disrespect, I read it but didn't have time to give a proper reply at the time.

I appreciated your perspective and found it a rather refreshing point of view. Too bad I can't re-read it again today. Its like the difference between a CD and a live performance. I was nice to hear.


----------



## Kralc

Maybe we should blame the movies for making the music turn the way it has, this for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YatZXieJsL4&feature=g-logo (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YatZXieJ ... ure=g-logo) 
I'm pretty sure I've seen this movie about 3 times before and it's not even out yet. :shock:


----------



## Ed

hey don't knock the pop corn films. Visually they are amazing achievements. Just wish they'd put as much thought into the script and a deep story we care about.


----------



## Kralc

I'm not knocking the pop-corners, I love them, sure they're filled with plot-holes, and cheesy lines, I love the ridiculous explosions, crazy robots shooting up everything, but this, this movie looks appalling. I've seen it, even heard it all before. It sounds like they're just using the foley library from Transformers movies. The premise of "dating the captain's daughter" ughhh. And I don't even remember the Battleship game having a story. It just feels like they're scraping the barrel story-wise.
But they make a ton of money, so why stop, right? 

I second that wish though.


----------



## Jeffrey Peterson

Kralc @ Fri Dec 09 said:


> I'm not knocking the pop-corners, I love them, sure they're filled with plot-holes, and cheesy lines, I love the ridiculous explosions, crazy robots shooting up everything, but this, this movie looks appalling. I've seen it, even heard it all before. It sounds like they're just using the foley library from Transformers movies. The premise of "dating the captain's daughter" ughhh. And I don't even remember the Battleship game having a story. It just feels like they're scraping the barrel story-wise.
> But they make a ton of money, so why stop, right?
> 
> I second that wish though.



+1


----------



## Niah

Well, it's good to see that some things never change in VI Control and one of them is this neverending discussion about the...errr..."everything was good before" type of thing in the Composition, Orchestration & Technique section of the forum ... a section dedicated to hmm.. "Discussions on composing and scoring music. Tips and suggestions on how to improve your orchestral mockups and midi techniques. Feel free to post unfinished or experimental works and get feedback."

Definitely the right place for this thread and all of the others that have pressided this one, on this very same topic



synergy543 @ Thu Dec 08 said:


> Folks, if you haven't noticed, many things have changed in recent years towards uber-simplfication and generally rather low production values. Both in pop and film music. Its not just a matter of personal taste, its fact.



The thing is that although taste has something to do with it I would agree with you that it goes beyond that. For me personally things like perspective and definitely perception play a bigger role in the sense that we tend to perceive what came before as being better than what is happening now in all aspects of life. A good example of this is what Michel Gondry says in this interview at minute 4:28:

http://youtu.be/BN4Ni_kOyCI?t=4m28s

The issue I take however with your comment is that you posted "...it's fact." Now where I come from there's this saying that goes something like this "against facts there are no arguments". So present us with the facts so this discussion that has been going on for years here can finally end and we can move on.  Because really what I have only seem so far in all these years were subjective arguments, opinions and observations but never facts. Basically different perceptions of reality.

However there is one fact that I would like to mention and that is that we are not kids or teenagers anymore so of course that most of us don't tolerate what is sold to us by hollywood. It is a business and an industry after all designed to make money...were things really great back then? Lets hear what this guy by the name of Orson Welles has to say about good ol' hollywood 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaC3Hp36wXY



MichaelL @ Sun Dec 04 said:


> I think it's age. Once you get out of the cherished 18 -34 demographic, they don't make many movies for you.




eerr..no, they DO make them, just not in hollywood. Like this one for example, not exactly PG-13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFtDzK64-pk

or this 

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


----------



## choc0thrax

Niah @ Sun Dec 25 said:


> Well, it's good to see that some things never change in VI Control and one of them is this neverending discussion about the...errr..."everything was good before" type of thing in the Composition, Orchestration & Technique section of the forum ... a section dedicated to hmm.. "Discussions on composing and scoring music. Tips and suggestions on how to improve your orchestral mockups and midi techniques. Feel free to post unfinished or experimental works and get feedback."
> 
> Definitely the right place for this thread and all of the others that have pressided this one, on this very same topic
> 
> 
> 
> synergy543 @ Thu Dec 08 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Folks, if you haven't noticed, many things have changed in recent years towards uber-simplfication and generally rather low production values. Both in pop and film music. Its not just a matter of personal taste, its fact.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The thing is that although taste has something to do with it I would agree with you that it goes beyond that. For me personally things like perspective and definitely perception play a bigger role in the sense that we tend to perceive what came before as being better than what is happening now in all aspects of life. A good example of this is what Michel Gondry says in this interview at minute 4:28:
> 
> http://youtu.be/BN4Ni_kOyCI?t=4m28s
> 
> The issue I take however with your comment is that you posted "...it's fact." Now where I come from there's this saying that goes something like this "against facts there are no arguments". So present us with the facts so this discussion that has been going on for years here can finally end and we can move on.  Because really what I have only seem so far in all these years were subjective arguments, opinions and observations but never facts. Basically different perceptions of reality.
> 
> However there is one fact that I would like to mention and that is that we are not kids or teenagers anymore so of course that most of us don't tolerate what is sold to us by hollywood. It is a business and an industry after all designed to make money...were things really great back then? Lets hear what this guy by the name of Orson Welles has to say about good ol' hollywood
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JaC3Hp36wXY
> 
> 
> 
> MichaelL @ Sun Dec 04 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think it's age. Once you get out of the cherished 18 -34 demographic, they don't make many movies for you.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> eerr..no, they DO make them, just not in hollywood. Like this one for example, not exactly PG-13
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFtDzK64-pk
> 
> or this
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xzitmvuOLKE
Click to expand...


Yay, Niah's back. A Christmas miracle. I like to think it's because I looked at his profile a few days ago.

BTW I hated Dogtooth... well what I saw of it before I turned it off.


----------



## Niah

choc0thrax @ Sun Dec 25 said:


> Yay, Niah's back. A Christmas miracle. I like to think it's because I looked at his profile a few days ago.



It had something with it yes. :mrgreen:


----------



## choc0thrax

Niah @ Sun Dec 25 said:


> choc0thrax @ Sun Dec 25 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Yay, Niah's back. A Christmas miracle. I like to think it's because I looked at his profile a few days ago.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It had something with it yes. :mrgreen:
Click to expand...


^>| It's good to have you back. As you can see, madness and anarchy have reigned supreme during your slumber.


I was screwin around in my control panel the other day and noticed I had one name in my friends list... yours! I've now added Ed, and ticked the option to be notified every time he comes online and goes offline. Great for stalking.


----------



## Ed

choc0thrax @ Sun Dec 25 said:


> I was screwin around in my control panel the other day and noticed I had one name in my friends list... yours! I've now added Ed, and ticked the option to be notified every time he comes online and goes offline. Great for stalking.



I am tickled by the notion that you're stalking me.


----------



## Niah

choc0thrax @ Sun Dec 25 said:


> It had something with it yes. :mrgreen:



^>| It's good to have you back. As you can see, madness and anarchy have reigned supreme during your slumber.

[/quote]

Thanks  and yes I can see that and as a friend has said to me before, "the blind leading blind" also reigns upon this place :cry: 

Anyway sure missed you guys. 8)


----------



## KEnK

Niah @ Sun Dec 25 said:


> ...Now where I come from there's this saying that goes something like this "against facts there are no arguments". So present us with the facts so this discussion that has been going on for years here can finally end and we can move on.  Because really what I have only seem so far in all these years were subjective arguments, opinions and observations but never facts. Basically different perceptions of reality.
> 
> However there is one fact that I would like to mention and that is that we are not kids or teenagers anymore so of course that most of us don't tolerate what is sold to us by hollywood.


One "fact" is the tools- The DAWs, the sample libraries, etc. 
This is very different than in previous decades, and has changed things immensely.

Last night at a party, my Wonderful Wife, who's is not a musician at all was able to "play" like Paganini, because of an app on an iPad. 
I was accompanying her on guitar, making it a little more interesting by playing chords arpeggios and some modulations. 
This would not have been possible a few years ago.
Now Anyone w/ a DAW can be a composer.
(I am amazed that Reznor got an oscar for "The Social Network"
This is extremely rudimentary _synth 101_ type "music").

These tools and their widespread use really have changed the act and facts of composition. 
I don't see how that's debatable or subjective.
My Wife, not a musician, _can_ score your film now.
This is an _actual fact_ and has changed the game immeasurably.

k


----------



## poseur

KEnK @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> These tools and their widespread use really have changed the act and facts of composition.
> I don't see how that's debatable or subjective.
> My Wife, not a musician, _can_ score your film now.
> This is an _actual fact_ and has changed the game immeasurably.



i think that some of us actually do "measure" this,
albeit, often from _remarkably_ differing perspectives.


----------



## KEnK

poseur @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> KEnK @ Mon Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> These tools and their widespread use really have changed the act and facts of composition.
> I don't see how that's debatable or subjective.
> My Wife, not a musician, _can_ score your film now.
> This is an _actual fact_ and has changed the game immeasurably.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> i think that some of us actually do "measure" this,
> albeit, often from _remarkably_ differing perspectives.
Click to expand...

 :roll: 
By what yardstick?


----------



## Niah

KEnK @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> Niah @ Sun Dec 25 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...Now where I come from there's this saying that goes something like this "against facts there are no arguments". So present us with the facts so this discussion that has been going on for years here can finally end and we can move on.  Because really what I have only seem so far in all these years were subjective arguments, opinions and observations but never facts. Basically different perceptions of reality.
> 
> However there is one fact that I would like to mention and that is that we are not kids or teenagers anymore so of course that most of us don't tolerate what is sold to us by hollywood.
> 
> 
> 
> One "fact" is the tools- The DAWs, the sample libraries, etc.
> This is very different than in previous decades, and has changed things immensely.
> 
> Last night at a party, my Wonderful Wife, who's is not a musician at all was able to "play" like Paganini, because of an app on an iPad.
> I was accompanying her on guitar, making it a little more interesting by playing chords arpeggios and some modulations.
> This would not have been possible a few years ago.
> Now Anyone w/ a DAW can be a composer.
> (I am amazed that Reznor got an oscar for "The Social Network"
> This is extremely rudimentary _synth 101_ type "music").
> 
> These tools and their widespread use really have changed the act and facts of composition.
> I don't see how that's debatable or subjective.
> My Wife, not a musician, _can_ score your film now.
> This is an _actual fact_ and has changed the game immeasurably.
> 
> k
Click to expand...


That is indeed a fact but like poseur has mentioned we seem to see these aspects in very different lights.

How is technology responsible for this downfall so many speak about? Is technology really responsible or is it the way people are using it that you find it so threatening and distasteful?

Regarding the oscars, I really don't know what to say about your comment. Do you really take that ceremony seriously? It's essencially the industry rewarding itself, and it's often political too, like the grammies and the golden globes, etc...so take it as it is and was and don't expect much.

Your wonderful wife is not a musician? Says who? She can score my film now? That's great ! Maybe she is exactly what I need for my movie.

Essentially I don't find anything negative about tools being more and more accessible to everyone in all of the artistic realm plus more and more people expressing themselves. 
Can anyone create music these days? Sure I guess so. But can anyone create a piece of music that will move me, change me and continue to do so over a long period of time? The answer is of course no.

Now I do understand that the future is unpredictable and it's difficult to make a right assessement of even what is happening now. But picture this: Lets say that in the past you would have 10 artists creating works but out of those 10 only 1 was creating work that was really interesting to you. Now because of the democratizating of tools that have broken the economic and social barriers you have say 100, but proportionally you will have not 1 but 10 artists that work interests you.
Now I understand that this is fairly optimistic perspective but the challenge of today is really in filtering out the quality of this vast ocean of work being produced by the minute from the rest that might just be noise to you. However that's also something that technology WILL take part on in the process.

But I foresee a future that is pluralistic and equalitarian where everyone have the same of opportunities. If you don't like what your neighbour is doing...switch off and do it your way, because now it's the time where you really can. This is the time where artists have POWER, access to means of production, access to means of distribution, etc...

It's a time where art can go back to it's purest form free from the monsters of the industry, careerism, professionalism, etc...

Viva la globalización ! =o 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zui4s0aLpr4


----------



## givemenoughrope

KEnK @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> (I am amazed that Reznor got an oscar for "The Social Network"
> This is extremely rudimentary _synth 101_ type "music").



I dare you to make any music in this style and make it sound half as interesting, have half the production value, or be half as integral to a piece of film. Seriously, try it before simply putting it down. I'd bet the farm that you can't.


----------



## MichaelL

givemenoughrope @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> I dare you to make any music in this style and make it sound half as interesting, have half the production value, or be half as integral to a piece of film. Seriously, try it before simply putting it down. I'd bet the farm that you can't.



I thought the music worked very well in the film. But....as I recall it was not written FOR the film (hence part of the Oscar controversy). 

Maybe it's urban legend, but I think I saw an interview in which they stated that the music was part of a bunch of pre-existing tracks that they gave to the film's producer.
If so, it's "integral" by chance rather than by design.


----------



## Guy Bacos

I loved the soundtrack of "The Social network", maybe it is extremely rudimentary synth 101 type "music", I don't know, I don't deal with this style, but that doesn't matter, it was the artist's approach that earns the credit, and even though I'm no connaiseur with this stuff, it was very effective. So full merits in my opinion.


----------



## givemenoughrope

The pre-existing tracks from the NIN album Ghosts (sparse, instrumental and a departure from the other NIN albums, worth a listen) were used as temp tracks. 

I'm not saying it's Prokovief but it isn't easy.


----------



## KEnK

Niah @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> That is indeed a fact but like poseur has mentioned we seem to see these aspects in very different lights.
> 
> How is technology responsible for this downfall so many speak about? Is technology really responsible or is it the way people are using it that you find it so threatening and distasteful?
> 
> Regarding the oscars, I really don't know what to say about your comment. Do you really take that ceremony seriously? It's essencially the industry rewarding itself, and it's often political too, like the grammies and the golden globes, etc...so take it as it is and was and don't expect much.
> 
> Your wonderful wife is not a musician? Says who? She can score my film now? That's great ! Maybe she is exactly what I need for my movie.


Niah-

I'm simply offering the "fact" that you said was missing from the argument,
"Things have changed..." 

I don't personally listen to or care about pop music,
so I'm not threatened by my Wonderful Wife's Hit Record or Oscar.
Quite to the contrary, as skill or craft becomes more rarefied, by default,
what I do becomes even more "special" and unique.
So-by all means, use all the loops and presets you like. o-[][]-o 

As to this question:
How is technology responsible for this downfall so many speak about?
Certainly the Recording Industry seems to feel threatened by current technology.
I know you aren't talking about Piracy there, but it does come to mind.

There's already been enough discussion earlier in this thread about Musical Evolution or a lack thereof.

But- an analogy comes to mind:
Carpenters. Electricians. Plumbers. Airline Pilots.

I'll bet you respect all the above Crafts to the point wear you might not 
buy a house built by someone who had no skill or understanding of the "how to's"
Computer Flight Simulators are getting really good these days.
Why not let "Anybody" fly your plane?

Of course you wouldn't want that.
What do the above skills have to do w/ Music?
Nothing
The above are Real World Skills,
Music can be done by Anybody.

I think that is something that has also "changed" fairly recently.


----------



## Niah

KEnK @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> Niah @ Mon Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That is indeed a fact but like poseur has mentioned we seem to see these aspects in very different lights.
> 
> How is technology responsible for this downfall so many speak about? Is technology really responsible or is it the way people are using it that you find it so threatening and distasteful?
> 
> Regarding the oscars, I really don't know what to say about your comment. Do you really take that ceremony seriously? It's essencially the industry rewarding itself, and it's often political too, like the grammies and the golden globes, etc...so take it as it is and was and don't expect much.
> 
> Your wonderful wife is not a musician? Says who? She can score my film now? That's great ! Maybe she is exactly what I need for my movie.
> 
> 
> 
> Niah-
> 
> I'm simply offering the "fact" that you said was missing from the argument,
> "Things have changed..."
> 
> I don't personally listen to or care about pop music,
> so I'm not threatened by my Wonderful Wife's Hit Record or Oscar.
> Quite to the contrary, as skill or craft becomes more rarefied, by default,
> what I do becomes even more "special" and unique.
> So-by all means, use all the loops and presets you like. o-[][]-o
> 
> As to this question:
> How is technology responsible for this downfall so many speak about?
> Certainly the Recording Industry seems to feel threatened by current technology.
> I know you aren't talking about Piracy there, but it does come to mind.
> 
> There's already been enough discussion earlier in this thread about Musical Evolution or a lack thereof.
> 
> But- an analogy comes to mind:
> Carpenters. Electricians. Plumbers. Airline Pilots.
> 
> I'll bet you respect all the above Crafts to the point wear you might not
> buy a house built by someone who had no skill or understanding of the "how to's"
> Computer Flight Simulators are getting really good these days.
> Why not let "Anybody" fly your plane?
> 
> Of course you wouldn't want that.
> What do the above skills have to do w/ Music?
> Nothing
> The above are Real World Skills,
> Music can be done by Anybody.
> 
> I think that is something that has also "changed" fairly recently.
Click to expand...


KenK, there seems to be some confusion here.

As I said earlier, this discussion has been going on forever (years even) and the "argument" if you can call that seems more like venting than anything else as someone here has already mentioned. Which is again, this idea that the past was so much better than what we have now. Now I have already addressed this that I consider to be a product of our personal experiences, perceptions, etc...it's in the post I have already written. 
IMO we can only speculate and until this era or period that we are going through now is over we can never really objectively and factually determine if we are witnessing indeed a downfall or a decline as some people defend. I hold my judgment here although I don't hide my optimism. But I don't claim to be a fact.

Now I fail to see what is the fact that you mention that proves this downfall. Technology? "Things have changed"?

The world is always changing and so is technology. The electric guitar is technology and so is the synthesizer or the sampler. Back in the 80's with the first wave of music technology when alot of these gadgets became widely available people used loops and presets and they made very interesting music, most didn't of course but those are now forgotten. If you don't care for any of these works from that time that just relates to what I was talking about which is personal preferences. People were having almost the exact same conversations we are having now in the sense that they saw this technology has something that would kill music, drum machines were going to replace real drummers and of course nothing like that came to light and we are still here with a second wave of music technology. A second wave of music technology that offers such realism, that speaking of drummers I don't remember the last time I hired one but that's not because of technology but rather economy. Nothing to me replaces an amazing drummer and if I a choice I would use both mediums as I did before with others things.
Now the thing is and that some seem to forget is that the more technology advances the more skill you need in order to use them to their maximum potential. You refer to that in your post but that is solely an artisan perspective. Which is absolutely true and valid and I do acknowledge it. However skill and craft are not the only ingredients for music and other mediums IMO. You can present to me a very well crafted and technically perfect piece that just doesn't say much, that it's not original, different, grounbreaking, provocative and that just makes me indifferent.
Also I think I failed to communicate that I was pushing for a more artistic perspective in the sense that what you need is a good idea, something that we have never seen before, that changes us, our culture, a generation... but just having such an idea is not enough you need access to tools whatever they may be to make that idea a reality, now sometimes that requires alot of skill and craft and sometimes none at all.

The blair witch project was a great idea that required very little skill, craft, and production compared to a typical summer blockbuster of the same genre. And not only it made a huge profit but everything that came after that borrows the same concept pales in comparison and the impact is diminished.

In sum everyone is special in some way and have something valid and important to show, their life, their experiences...lets give them the opportunity and the tools but lets not tell them what to do and what not to do either with these new authors or the audience.

I may have wandered off and ramble a bit, sorry about that...


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Welcome to the embracing of the death of craft, folks. Anyone can score a film and it does not matter if they actually know what they are doing as long as with tools they can get it done.


----------



## David Story

"There is no future, there is no past; No roots nor fruits, but momentary flowers."


----------



## Niah

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> Welcome to the embracing of the death of craft, folks. Anyone can score a film and it does not matter if they actually know what they are doing as long as with tools they can get it done.



oh man what a gloomy apocalyptic morning do I wake up to..is it 2012 already? :roll: 

Anyone can buy a guitar. Anyone can play the guitar. But can anyone play it like Hendrix? Or Kaki King?

It's the people on the "opposite side" of the "argument" that are saying the things you are saying.

I think I replied to KenK saying that skill and craft is still going to be necessary in the future but skill and craft is not everything although I wouldn't be surprised if you think it is.

I believe the problem so many of you are having is that this skill and craft (which is not so black and white as it is painted to me but lets not go there) is not valued by the public like you value it. And if that is the reality than the problem is in education. And I mean public education.

If this is indeed the death of craft then it's the death of craftsmen and the dawn of artists.

To quote someone "The first person who installed an urinol in a dadaist artist museum, Duchamp, was an artist...the second was a plummer..."

At the end of the day anyone who just owns craft and skill is nothing more than a carpenter...you still need a revolutionary idea to cut through the noise...

There are very well skilled and very well crafted movies being made all the time that are totally empty and lack of substance..

If there's anyone dying here is the industry ... and the question is why? Could it be that artists just don't need them anymore as much as they needed in the past?

You are at a turning point yes and I think we don't know that if it's going to turn out to be good or bad and that scares us. Change scare us always did always will because we don't know where it will lead us. It's the uncertainty...


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

I bet you it's only the tiny gigs where 'anyone' can get a scoring gig. I have very rarely lost a soundtrack gig to an amateur. Most of the time, I have total respect for my competition. Maybe that's a powerful motivating tool...

And BTW, Trent Reznor TOTALLY deserves any trophy from Hollywood. Any idea how many of his pieces have been used as temp to inspire us? How many have been licensed in soundtracks? And you think it's simple to do what he does? Sure... he's only been at it (successfuly) since the early 80s. He's a trained pianist and one of my all-time musical electronic music heroes. 
It's so easy now, everybody can do it, etc. Yeah? Let's see a show of hands then - who's getting all these gigs from knowing how to operate an iPad app? I'm curious, and very skeptical.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Niah @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 26 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Welcome to the embracing of the death of craft, folks. Anyone can score a film and it does not matter if they actually know what they are doing as long as with tools they can get it done.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1. At the end of the day anyone who just owns craft and skill is nothing more than a carpenter...you still need a revolutionary idea to cut through the noise...
> 
> There are very well skilled and very well crafted movies being made all the time that are totally empty and lack of substance..
> 
> 2. If there's anyone dying here is the industry ... and the question is why? Could it be that artists just don't need them anymore as much as they needed in the past?
> 
> 3. You are at a turning point yes and I think we don't know that if it's going to turn out to be good or bad and that scares us. Change scare us always did always will because we don't know where it will lead us. It's the uncertainty...
Click to expand...


1. Of course craft and skill alone is not enough but a basic mastery of it should be a prerequisite. You don't read James Joyce before you can understand "Tom Sawyer"  Art and craft are husband and wife. Art without craft is what artistically talented children produce; full of promise but without the ability to fully realize it yet. If you buy a table designed by a carpenter that is beautiful to look at but because the carpenter was not a craftsman will not support the weight of objects being placed on it, then you don't really have a table, you have an object d'art.

And not all movies are meant to be "substantive." Mostly, and this has always ben true, they are meant to be entertaining.

2. Yes, they do need them but the are blinded by their arrogance and ignorance. into thinking they do not. A guy like J.J. Abrams gets it.

3. We are past the turning point. The change is already happening and many of us already know it is going to be for the worse. 

Aren't you the guy who revelled in the fact that your wife, a non-musician, can score a film ? With all due respect to her, she cannot do one as well as I can and if a non-musician can get hired to do so, that will be regress, not progress.

I am too old to be really affected by this. Any chance I ever had to become a top tier composer has come and gone anyway but I am saddened by the fact that young composers who do what I did, which is study music all my life, study orchestration and film scoring, AND learn to be conversant with the technology, will lose gigs to rock stars who have done little or none of that and may very well indeed lose gigs to somebody's wife who is a non-musician.

So embrace "change" if you will but I am going to call it as I see it, which is less progress than regress. I stand with the OP.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> I bet you it's only the tiny gigs where 'anyone' can get a scoring gig. I have very rarely lost a soundtrack gig to an amateur. Most of the time, I have total respect for my competition. Maybe that's a powerful motivating tool...
> 
> And BTW, Trent Reznor TOTALLY deserves any trophy from Hollywood. Any idea how many of his pieces have been used as temp to inspire us? How many have been licensed in soundtracks? And you think it's simple to do what he does? Sure... he's only been at it (successfuly) since the early 80s. He's a trained pianist and one of my all-time musical electronic music heroes.
> It's so easy now, everybody can do it, etc. Yeah? Let's see a show of hands then - who's getting all these gigs from knowing how to operate an iPad app? I'm curious, and very skeptical.



No disrespect to Trent, and certainly not everyone can do what he does but I guarantee you Ned that is you take away Trent's name from the credits and substitute yours or mine and do not let the industry know that Trent actually did it, that particular score does not walk away with the Oscar based solely on its merits. It is not a bad score but no way was it the best score of the year IMHO.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa

Jay, Oscars are bull anyways, n'est-ce-pas? It's just like 10 buck popcorn, endless film posters with giant, over-marketed faces instead of imaginative art, smoke and mirrors to keep people from actually thinking after the movie ...

Reznor work in NIN (particularly The Downward Spiral) will outlast most other rock/alternative music of the late 20th Century because it's as dark and beautiful as is our soul when it's revealed. That said, I for one am thrilled that he will get more recognition. Most people think of him as a screaming metal guy or something - his music is so much more.

I love strings, brass, winds and percs, but there so much more sound-wise available to us now. A composer like Reznor makes it easier for those of us who like our nuts mixed.

PS: I bet you I'm not the only guy here who feels that noise, glorious filtered/reverbed/squashed/chopped-up noise, is just as vital to music making as silence, and clean notes, sounds.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> Jay, Oscars are bull anyways, n'est-ce-pas? It's just like 10 buck popcorn, endless film posters with giant, over-marketed faces instead of imaginative art, smoke and mirrors to keep people from actually thinking after the movie ...
> 
> Reznor work in NIN (particularly The Downward Spiral) will outlast most other rock/alternative music of the late 20th Century because it's as dark and beautiful as is our soul when it's revealed. That said, I for one am thrilled that he will get more recognition. Most people think of him as a screaming metal guy or something - his music is so much more.
> 
> I love strings, brass, winds and percs, but there so much more sound-wise available to us now. A composer like Reznor makes it easier for those of us who like our nuts mixed.



Undoubtedly, but what Trent does so well with NIN is irrelevant in a discussion about how good one of his film scores is. Paul McCartney did a helluva a job with the Beatles but his score for "The Family Way", which mostly was done by George Martin anyway, was only adequate.

Once again, being a great rock or pop or jazz recording artist does NOT automatically make one a good film scorer, Some, like Danny Elfman, clearly learn to be but the majority do not. 

And yeah, the Oscar is b.s. but sometimes they get iti right. This IMHO was not one of those cases.


----------



## rayinstirling

EastWest Lurker @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> Undoubtedly, but what Trent does so well with NIN is irrelevant in a discussion about how good one of his film scores is. Paul McCartney did a helluva a job with the Beatles but his score for "The Family Way", which mostly was done by George Martin anyway, was only adequate.
> 
> Once again, being a great rock or pop or jazz recording artist does NOT automatically make one a good film scorer, Some, like Danny Elfman, clearly learn to be but the majority do not.
> 
> And yeah, the Oscar is b.s. but sometimes they get iti right. This IMHO was not one of those cases.



It always amazes me how on forums like this, the less than great can have such an educated? and irrefutable opinion on who should but more often who should not be deemed great.

Fortunately, neither Trent or Paul and other successful composers could give a toss about your opinion.

I'm not arguing for or against their work on films but just the irrelevance of these opinions. Seems no more than wasted hot air me.

Every artist serves their apprenticeship by studying the output of others including the tools they used, then, if they have imagination they start creating their own art. If they don't then parody will be the pinnacle of success. There's a lot of that about here.


----------



## KEnK

Niah @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> KenK, there seems to be some confusion here...
> 
> Now I fail to see what is the fact that you mention that proves this downfall. Technology? "Things have changed"?


Hello Niah-

There does seem to be some confusion, but I don't think it's _all_ mine. :wink: 
I was attempting to supply a _fact_ that you claimed was _missing_ from this discussion.


Niah @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> _...Now where I come from there's this saying that goes something like this "against facts there are no arguments". So present us with the facts so this discussion that has been going on for years here can finally end and we can move on. Smile Because really what I have only seem so far in all these years were subjective arguments, opinions and observations but never facts. Basically different perceptions of reality._


The Tools have made it possible to make Music w/o being a Musician.
While this doesn't end the discussion, it is certainly a new variable in the equation.
This particular aspect doesn't seem the same as the "LinnDrum replacing Drummer argument". 
I think you can admit that it goes rather further than that.

As to "Embracing Change", it's central to my Musical Philosophy.
And perhaps here's where our perspectives differ:

I love the New Idea, the latest step in Musical Evolution.
I long for it.
Whereas you think Technology will help bring this about,
I see using the DAW as the primary tool for music making as stifling innovation.
The looped based forms are evolving at a much slower rate
than Music played by Humans.

Look at any 10 year period of any style you choose for comparison.
(ooh.. I can sense the outraged masses, pitchforks and torches raised.)
:evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: 

Consider the DAW's replacing the pencil as the Primary Tool for Composing Film Music,
and perhaps you can extrapolate a reason for the current state of Film Music.
Certainly you can admit that even within a wide range of stylistic differences,
there is a more formulaic approach, even in independent film than in previous decades.
(pre-DAW)

Now, I don't hate the DAW, I love it, 
and have gotten quite good at using the mouse instead of an instrument.
But I am not bound by it. 
This is what I see as the stifling aspect of the DAW.
It is entirely possible to make music w/o knowing a thing about it.

And here's where the Big Argument arises.
A lot of people are trying to say that it's all equal, quality is entirely subjective.

But do you really think that Duchamp's Urinal is equal to Michelangelo's David?

k


----------



## MichaelL

KEnK @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> Whereas you think Technology will help bring this about,
> I see using the DAW as the primary tool for music making as stifling innovation.
> The looped based forms are evolving at a much slower rate
> than Music played by Humans.
> 
> 
> Now, I don't hate the DAW, I love it,
> and have gotten quite good at using the mouse instead of an instrument.
> But I am not bound by it.
> This is what I see as the stifling aspect of the DAW.
> It is entirely possible to make music w/o knowing a thing about it.




To me the DAW is merely a recording medium -- no different that putting pencil to paper. You do know, I presume, that there are many DAW composers who do not use loops? I perform the music that I create into the DAW. So why do you think the DAW is all about loops?


----------



## EastWest Lurker

rayinstirling @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue Dec 27 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Undoubtedly, but what Trent does so well with NIN is irrelevant in a discussion about how good one of his film scores is. Paul McCartney did a helluva a job with the Beatles but his score for "The Family Way", which mostly was done by George Martin anyway, was only adequate.
> 
> Once again, being a great rock or pop or jazz recording artist does NOT automatically make one a good film scorer, Some, like Danny Elfman, clearly learn to be but the majority do not.
> 
> And yeah, the Oscar is b.s. but sometimes they get iti right. This IMHO was not one of those cases.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It always amazes me how on forums like this, the less than great can have such an educated? and irrefutable opinion on who should but more often who should not be deemed great.
> 
> Fortunately, neither Trent or Paul and other successful composers could give a toss about your opinion.
> 
> I'm not arguing for or against their work on films but just the irrelevance of these opinions. Seems no more than wasted hot air me.
> 
> Every artist serves their apprenticeship by studying the output of others including the tools they used, then, if they have imagination they start creating their own art. If they don't then parody will be the pinnacle of success. There's a lot of that about here.
Click to expand...


I have never nor would I ever describe my opinion as "irrefutable", it is just my opinion. But it IS an educated opinion for however much or little people assign to that fact.


----------



## Ed

MichaelL @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> To me the DAW is merely a recording medium -- no different that putting pencil to paper. You do know, I presume, that there are many DAW composers who do not use loops? I perform the music that I create into the DAW. So why do you think the DAW is all about loops?



For the same reason they also presumably think all music made with a synth is the same. 

They just switch off as soon as they hear guitars or synths. Its not orchestral or classical, so they just hear *VOMIT*.


----------



## choc0thrax

I wouldn't pay attention to Jay, he's nothing more than a horsefly nipping at a champion stallion. o=?


----------



## poseur

EastWest Lurker @ Mon Dec 26 said:


> Welcome to the embracing of the death of craft, folks. Anyone can score a film and it does not matter if they actually know what they are doing as long as with tools they can get it done.



as you know, jay, that's some seriously overgeneralised bullsh•t,
based not at all on our broader reality, but on what some hopefuls occasionally spout (@ often particularly high decibel-levels, _maybe_).

craft doesn't die..... and, it's still both audible & visible;
certainly so, in both music & film-scoring, whose crafts overlap.....
but, are not precisely the same.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

I am not saying that is how it is (yet) poseur, I am saying that some here seem to think that conceptually if it happens, it is not necessarily better or worse, just different, which I do not accept at all.


----------



## KEnK

MichaelL @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> To me the DAW is merely a recording medium -- no different that putting pencil to paper. You do know, I presume, that there are many DAW composers who do not use loops? I perform the music that I create into the DAW. So why do you think the DAW is all about loops?


I never said that and never thought that.
I did say I use one.


Ed @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> For the same reason they also presumably think all music made with a synth is the same.
> 
> They just switch off as soon as they hear guitars or synths. Its not orchestral or classical, so they just hear *VOMIT*.


Do you think it might be possible to exchange different ideas w/o resorting to sophomoric
commentary?

I'll happily date myself here...
I studied synthesis at the same time I studied classical composition.
This was actually pre-midi. So I've been turning knobs for a very long time.
Not quite as long as I've been playing guitar though.

Just want you to know your personal assumptions are way off base.

k


----------



## poseur

EastWest Lurker @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> I am not saying that is how it is (yet) poseur, I am saying that some here seem to think that conceptually if it happens, it is not necessarily better or worse, just different, which I do not accept at all.



thanks, jay --- i know.
i understood you, wasn't saying that you are personally spouting bullsh•t.

it's that pie-in-the-darkening-sky-of-burgeoning-availability crap that yabberers so often seem to spew
which olfactorily/intellectually appears, so eminently, to stink of dung:
"you don't have to be a musician to make music", etc etc etc.

well:
of course, you don't.

it's always been that way.

you can build a gazillion instruments, buy a guitar or whatever for $5, form a "working" band w/other folks
who don't "work" much at music.

you can record it (maybe badly and/or without originality), play it (badly and/or without originality),
and have fun & (maybe, even) make some money doing so.

so, has technology changed all that, in essence?
no, not really.
no.

other, maybe, than in some details:
you can now
1) fake orchestral music (maybe badly and/or without originality),
2) lower the audio standards that some strove with great difficulty to increase,
3) etc etc etc, and
3) even have fun & (maybe, even) make some money doing so.

but:
the quality of your music only increases via incessant, hard work,
some insight into the human condition & _inspiration_,
focused education, intention & musical motivations,
and/or via elements of that true rarity: inexplicable genius.

everything else is a wash, imo,
including the rise of technology's impact on music _production_,
which (of course) is something in which i can still revel.
but:
it's the music that's important.
acoustic instruments, pen & paper, sibelius & a DAW?
there's no reason not to include it all, afaic.....
tools is tools.
music is music.
development of musical craft increases my ability to communicate,
regardless of which specific musical craft it may be.

babbling, here, between cues.
and, notes on cues: damn.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

OK poseur, well stated, sir. We are on the same page,


----------



## KEnK

poseur @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> ...the quality of your music only increases via incessant, hard work,
> some insight into the human condition & _inspiration_,
> focused education, intention & musical motivations,
> and/or via elements of that true rarity: inexplicable genius.


Poseur,

I don't know if you agree w/ me or not,
but I agree w/ you.

k


----------



## Arbee

Apologies for not buying in to the apocalyptic vision of the musical future but:

When electricity came along and allowed a 3 piece band of guitar, bass and drums to wipe out both a symphony orchestra and a big band in terms of volume I'm sure the same conversations were being had. I for one would not want to have missed the art and craftsmanship of Jaco Pastorius, Steve Gadd, Jeff Beck, Toto etc etc etc etc plus the blending of cultural influences that has produced such exciting new rhythmic influences in music.

I have the greatest respect for (and experience with) the history of music with its rich counterpoint, melodic development, lush harmonic textures etc but new tools equals new opportunities and, despite giving untrained folk the ability to sound deceptively skilled, sooner or later those with artistic vision and craftsmanship will push music to a new level with the sonic tools now available. The ones that succeed will produce music that is accessible to the general public (remember them?) as well as being well crafted.

I for one can't wait to hear it. In fact, I think I do hear the seeds of it from time to time in some of our better modern TV themes.


----------



## Ed

KEnK @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> I'll happily date myself here...
> I studied synthesis at the same time I studied classical composition.
> This was actually pre-midi. So I've been turning knobs for a very long time.
> Not quite as long as I've been playing guitar though.
> 
> Just want you to know your personal assumptions are way off base.
> 
> k



You're the one that started talking about loops and DAWs. Someone earlier said trailer music is loop based. Sure sounds like these are opinions coming from people that only hear one thing and have no idea what they're talking about. Maybe its some kind of compulsion to acting intentionally ignorant

In regards what Jay keeps talking about with "craft", some forget that not all "craft" is the same. It is very different craft to create a good rock song than it is to create a good orchestral concert piece. What some people don't seem to allow themselves to understand is that just because its a different kind of craft doesnt mean there is no craft.

I've posted this before but.



Now just substitute parents for some people in this thread and dubstep for whatever music they say they hate so much


----------



## EastWest Lurker

[quote="Ed @ Tue Dec 27, 2011 2:19 pm"[/quote]

In regards what Jay keeps talking about with "craft", some forget that not all "craft" is the same. It is very different craft to create a good rock song than it is to create a good orchestral concert piece. What some people don't seem to allow themselves to understand is that just because its a different kind of craft doesnt mean there is no craft.

[/quote]

I am aware of that. I am talking about the craft of film scoring, which is not genre specific. There are great film scores in many genres. 

Had a director hired Goldsmith to produce a rock styled score and given him a little bit of time to research it and hire the right guys, I have zero doubt that if he accepted the gig he would have produced one that served the picture better than you or I could, because he was a far better craftsman.


----------



## dcoscina

I think I'm going to change this title to "I'm too old for this Thread"....

Some good points have been brought out and I find it interesting that my own personal disenchantment has served as fuel for the never ending debate about music creation in contemporary society.

I will only add that I agree with the sentiments that when it comes to ORCHESTRAL MUSIC, I do strongly feel that traditional methodology serves it the best- meaning either plotting notes on actual paper or else using a notation program like Sibelius or Finale which is pretty much analogous. Just generally speaking. Until someone composes something using a DAW that approaches the sophistication of a Le Sacre or Concerto for Orchestra or even a Star Wars or Close Encounters, I'm not convinced it's as good a method as the one used for (literally) centuries. 

Film is a whole other beast though. Clearly directors or even audiences no longer care about the inherent complexity or whether a score has an over all narrative structure or arc. They just don't care. And it's that kind of either ignorance or apathy that gets me down from time to time. I see filmmaking as largely the same. Not a lot of competent filmmakers out there. Where are the Kurosawas, Eisensteins, the Hitchcock's or Kubricks or Scorseses? 

On a purely principaled level, I'm right with Jay Asher. Obviously on a practical level, I have to throw up my hands and accept the "genesis" of how music has developed- which usually means I'm listening to music from 20 or so years ago if not earlier. And I enjoy it. So I don't have any new music to be excited by. There's still some terrific jazz guys and gals out there. But orchestral music is pretty flat, even if composed by guys like John Adams whose music I personally think has sufferred at the hands of DAWs....

I do like Australian composer Christopher Gordon a fair bit and he admitted he still composes directly into Finale. Not surprising. I also like some of Desplat. I hear the technique there. There are a few guys out there doing some good stuff but it doesn't floor me like a Herrmann score will (luckily I still haven't heard all of his music so when I discover a score of his, it's like it's new).


----------



## EastWest Lurker

And btw, the late Michael Kamen married rock music to traditional music in a way that served the picture really well with "Lethal Weapon" because he was a film scoring craftsman comfortable with both genres. 

I came up as a young man playing in rock and roll in bands. You can choose to believe me or not, but I guarantee you I could deliver a rock oriented score that would serve the picture better than most rock stars who may be more talented rock players or songwriters because I have a decent level of craft AND I understand the music. But I would not get the gig over one of them because my name does not put asses in the seats and it is all about that in today's bean counter mentality that runs the business. That is just the reality of it.


----------



## Ed

??? Where are all these non film composers writing music for films Jay?

The entire point of threads like these is to bash people like Hans Zimmer and so on. They are actually film composers, but the people complaining do not like synths or guitars as a matter of a rule. Such things they think shouldnt be in film music at all or they should at least be taking a major backseat to orchestral music. They reference the good old golden era of Hollywood and feel like the new style that people like Zimmer embody is an insult to not just film music but music in general.

Thats why they say trailer music is "loops", that is why they say a DAW is to compose with "loops" and they cant recognise any real musical skill in working with synths. Real composers, the ones they think are dying out, are the ones that compose with a paper and a pen or in a notation program. Nothing else really matters and is beneath them. Classical orchestral music with classic rules with classic sensibilities is the only thing matters. They are offended where hearing music with an orchestral sample or instrument used as if it was just another sound, how dare they use such instruments in this way!


----------



## givemenoughrope

EastWest Lurker @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> And btw, the late Michael Kamen married rock music to traditional music in a way that served the picture really well with "Lethal Weapon" because he was a film scoring craftsman comfortable with both genres.



Please. Michael Kamen is to Rock as Kenny G is to Jazz. Those scores are crap.


----------



## MichaelL

givemenoughrope @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> Please. Michael Kamen is to Rock as Kenny G is to Jazz. Those scores are crap.




When someone makes a statement like that I really want to see _their_ resume and hear _their_ reel.


----------



## givemenoughrope

Well, I haven't worked on X-Men but when I've delivered rock cues they sound like rock music and not the canned peach version IMO. He really took the most cliched, surface elements of bad 80s rock and played it against an orchestra. 

Nothing against Kamen in the orchestral vein. Even X-men was pretty great.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

MichaelL @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> givemenoughrope @ Tue Dec 27 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Please. Michael Kamen is to Rock as Kenny G is to Jazz. Those scores are crap.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> When someone makes a statement like that I really want to see _their_ resume and hear _their_ reel.
Click to expand...


Couldn't have said it better. 

Whether you like is as music is irrelevant, it plays the picture like crazy.


----------



## MichaelL

givemenoughrope @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> He really took the most cliched, surface elements of bad 80s rock and played it against an orchestra.




It WAS the 80's. AND... he had to settle for collaborating with Eric Clapton. How could you possibly expect REAL rock? (tongue firmly in cheek)


----------



## dcoscina

givemenoughrope @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Tue Dec 27 said:
> 
> 
> 
> And btw, the late Michael Kamen married rock music to traditional music in a way that served the picture really well with "Lethal Weapon" because he was a film scoring craftsman comfortable with both genres.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Please. Michael Kamen is to Rock as Kenny G is to Jazz. Those scores are crap.
Click to expand...


Perhaps you are too young to know this but Kamen did the string arrangement for a band in the '70s who you might not know of because they probably aren't "rock" enough for you but it was a little known song called "Comfortably Numb" by a small band called Pink Floyd. He also collaborated with another unknown band for a score that mixed rock songs with orchestra including a clunker called "Who Wants to Live Forever" with I think their name was Queen for a movie called Highlander. And of course Kamen knew nothing of rock when it came to Last Action Hero where he worked with ACDC among others to deliver a score that once again mixed orchestra with rock. Obviously I'm being very sarcastic. Kamen, perhaps more than any other film composer, frequently worked with rock musicians, legendary ones in fact, to bring that contemporary flavor to his scores. 

From Wikipedia:
Early work

Kamen's early work centered on ballets, thirteen in all, then expanding into Hollywood by writing the score for The Next Man in 1976, then into pop and rock arranging, collaborating with Pink Floyd on their album, The Wall.
[edit]Career in popular music

Kamen became a highly-sought arranger in the realms of pop and rock music. His contemporaries in this field included Academy Award winner Anne Dudley, Richard Niles, and Nick Ingman. His successes include his work with Pink Floyd, David Gilmour and Roger Waters[1] (he is one of the few people to have been invited to work with both former Pink Floyd members, after their acrimonious split), as well as Queen (orchestration on Who Wants To Live Forever), Eric Clapton (on Edge of Darkness), Roger Daltrey, Aerosmith (live orchestral version of Dream On for MTV), Tom Petty, David Bowie, Bryan Ferry, Eurythmics, Queensrÿche, Rush, Metallica (on their live album, S&M), Def Leppard, Herbie Hancock, The Cranberries, Bryan Adams, Jim Croce, Sting, and Kate Bush. For Bush, Kamen delivered an orchestral backing for "Moments of Pleasure" from The Red Shoes album, substantially building upon a simple piano theme Bush had composed. In this instance, and many others, he conducted the orchestra personally for the recording. In 1984, Kamen had similarly heightened the impact of a pop recording for the Eurythmics "Here Comes the Rain Again", that score relying as much on his compositional skills as his arranging talents. Five years later, he did the music for For Queen and Country.
In 1990, Kamen joined many other guests for Roger Waters' performance of The Wall in Berlin and headed the National Philharmonic Orchestra during the 24 Nights sessions with Eric Clapton the following year.
Lenny Kravitz recorded a cover of "Fields of Joy" on his 1991 CD Mama Said that Michael co-wrote with Hal Fredricks.
In 2002, he was part of the Concert for George as string conductor.
Kamen had a very successful partership with Bryan Adams and R.J. Lange composing scores and songs. The ballad "(Everything I Do) I Do It for You" for the 1991 film Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves would be the number one song of that year, worldwide. Other songs would be "All For Love" for the movie "The Three Musketeers" in 1993, and "Have You Ever Really Loved a Woman?" the song from the film "Don Juan DeMarco" in 1995.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Typical exchange on forums:

Poster A says, "That guy and/or his work sucks."

Poster B: "But he accomplished Great Thing A, Great Thing B, and Great Thing C and worked with Great Artist A, Great Artist B, and Great Artist C and you have not done any of that."

Poster A: "I don't care, it is my opinion and my opinion is as good as anyone else's, even guys who have done Great Thing B, and Great Thing C and worked with Great Artist A, Great Artist B, and Great Artist C."

It's laughable, frankly.


----------



## jleckie

Ed @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> The entire point of threads like these is to bash people like Hans Zimmer and so (snip)



THAT'S the point of this thread?!?! Sour grapes? Good heavens....


----------



## dcoscina

jleckie @ Tue Dec 27 said:


> Ed @ Tue Dec 27 said:
> 
> 
> 
> The entire point of threads like these is to bash people like Hans Zimmer and so (snip)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> THAT'S the point of this thread?!?! Sour grapes? Good heavens....
Click to expand...


Yes I agree. I'm not sure anyone even mentioned Zimmer. 

I personally don't care for pounding drums and all that in my music no matter who the composer is. It's just not my thing. Goldenthal's Wreckage and Rape from Alien3 is truly outstanding in the first half and I have to turn off the second half because it's like bad thrash music. John Williams' use of drums in A.I. is horrible. I actually like what Powell does because he uses some percussion elements as opposed to those big drums all the time...

but I will always prefer listening to a good rhythmic ostinato played by strings or winds or horns over anything that relies on a steady drum beat. Stravinsky's Rite of Spring kicks the crap out of anything written for film as far as kinetic energy goes in my opinion. And for volume, well, if you've heard Le Sacre live, it's da bomb.


----------



## noiseboyuk

dcoscina @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> I personally don't care for pounding drums and all that in my music no matter who the composer is. It's just not my thing. Goldenthal's Wreckage and Rape from Alien3 is truly outstanding in the first half and I have to turn off the second half because it's like bad thrash music. John Williams' use of drums in A.I. is horrible. I actually like what Powell does because he uses some percussion elements as opposed to those big drums all the time...



It's sorta where I am too too, having been a past offender of pounding drums and gone into self-loathing as a result. I just noticed that I mostly didn't like the drums in movies - they usually seem incongruous. Occasionally they work like in Lord Of The Rings where there is an artistic reason to use them, but more often than not its far less effective than well orchestrated traditional elements. Of course, it's far harder to achieve this, as my week long failure to deconstruct 10 seconds of an action cue in How To Train Your Dragon demonstrated to me quite powerfully. Still, I'm slowly learning a few skills.

Here's another thing to throw into the mix though, and I can see myself starting a thread of its own. I got the excellent Alien Vault book for Christmas, which just looks at the 1979 original film, which was scored by the mighty Jerry Goldsmith. It wasn't an entirely happy marriage. Here's what the book says: "Ridley Scott had rejected Goldsmith's first attempt as too broad, too obvious. 'His score was way too lush' agrees Giler. So the irritated composer went in the complete opposite direction, deliberately weird. Everybody loved it. Except Goldsmith. 'It took me ten minutes' he sighed."

As soon as I read that, I thought about these many debates on this forum, the death of craft etc. I just bet Scott, Giler et al were correct, and the score that was (largely) used in the final cut was right for the film. Goldsmith's superior skills were not appropriate for the story (with the important caveat that Goldsmith's "it took me ten minutes" shrug is a lot more skilful that he gives credit for). It's hard lesson to learn, but a powerful one... sometimes skill can get in the way. Storytelling is all (my hobby horse I know). And, of course, this particular example is 32 years old... so not a new problem,

I think the folks who are least happy here, and the most permanently frustrated, are those who are musicians and composers first and foremost... perhaps putting music to picture is always seen as a compromise, something that restricts the beauty and form of pure MUSIC. Personally this is the part of film music I love the most, the holy grail being the perfect marriage of two forms. It's why John Williams gets quoted so often, he often talks in interview about the other elements of the film, and how he has to fuse his own work with those.

I couldn't care less how simple or complex something is, all I care about is the effect on the film or TV show. My problem with a lot of contemporary music isn't that it requires less skill, it's that it doesn't work very well, it's derivative and it's boring. The Social Network score is far more imaginative that most give credit for, it was a bold direction to strike in a talky legal film and it added hugely to the cinematic effect. By contrast, the score in TV's Terra Nova is a typical bland modern score - big drums, big orchestra... and has no impact at all (for me, other opinions are available etc etc). I don't care what the elements are, I don't care how much musical skill was used, all I care about is "does it make the story better".


----------



## dcoscina

Film is a popular medium and has evolved or re-volved according to fashion for the most part. I think the bar was set very high initially by composers such as Korngold, Herrmann, Rosza, Goldsmith, Williams, Barry, etc. and some of us, me included, have a hard time because I will always measure current music to that yard stick. 

But I understand that not all scores have to be symphonic or even too complex.

PS- Goldsmith's technique was so good that what he refers to passing off in 10 minutes would take most of us a lifetime to do... that's where technique does save the day. I see that story being exactly about this.


----------



## noiseboyuk

dcoscina @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> PS- Goldsmith's technique was so good that what he refers to passing off in 10 minutes would take most of us a lifetime to do... that's where technique does save the day. I see that story being exactly about this.



Based on the recorded interview / reaction in that book, I disagree. It seems he was extremely unhappy about the direction he took - he clearly considered what he subsequently did to be inferior, "easy" music. I agree up to the point that his great skill made what he did seem easy to him, but I get no sense that when he sore the final picture he went "oh, actually they were right" - quite the opposite. If anyone else has any links suggesting otherwise from Goldsmith, I'd be fascinated to read though.

And that was the point of my post. If we score to picture, who are we serving? The filmmakers or our own musical satisfaction? I'm as in awe of Goldsmith as anyone, but it looks to me like he sometimes had a hard time in the world of compromise that is film scoring. Of course - frequently - directors and producers get it wrong, but a masterful director might push - or even reject - a masterful composer, and the director would be in the right.

One other observation about the music in Alien - in many of the most effective moments, there is none at all. They tried several ideas, and rejected them all. Again, I'm a huge fan of this (in the right place of course).


----------



## EastWest Lurker

noiseboyuk @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> dcoscina @ Wed Dec 28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> PS- Goldsmith's technique was so good that what he refers to passing off in 10 minutes would take most of us a lifetime to do... that's where technique does save the day. I see that story being exactly about this.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Based on the recorded interview / reaction in that book, I disagree. It seems he was extremely unhappy about the direction he took - he clearly considered what he subsequently did to be inferior, "easy" music. I agree up to the point that his great skill made what he did seem easy to him, but I get no sense that when he sore the final picture he went "oh, actually they were right" - quite the opposite. If anyone else has any links suggesting otherwise from Goldsmith, I'd be fascinated to read though.
> 
> And that was the point of my post. If we score to picture, who are we serving? The filmmakers or our own musical satisfaction? I'm as in awe of Goldsmith as anyone, but it looks to me like he sometimes had a hard time in the world of compromise that is film scoring. Of course - frequently - directors and producers get it wrong, but a masterful director might push - or even reject - a masterful composer, and the director would be in the right.
> 
> One other observation about the music in Alien - in many of the most effective moments, there is none at all. They tried several ideas, and rejected them all. Again, I'm a huge fan of this (in the right place of course).
Click to expand...


In the end, we serve the direcctors obviously,"render unto Caesar". Also obviously, Goldsmith learned to do that, which is why he did so many films and TV shows.

But it doesn't make them necessarily right. :twisted:


----------



## re-peat

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> Typical exchange on forums:
> Poster A says, "That guy and/or his work sucks."
> Poster B: "But he accomplished Great Thing A, Great Thing B, and Great Thing C and worked with Great Artist A, Great Artist B, and Great Artist C and you have not done any of that."
> Poster A: "I don't care, it is my opinion and my opinion is as good as anyone else's, even guys who have done Great Thing B, and Great Thing C and worked with Great Artist A, Great Artist B, and Great Artist C."
> 
> It's laughable, frankly.


No it isn’t. It is, with permission, you who are laughable in being unable to disconnect the quality of an opinion of a person from the recognition of his/her achievements. If you had your way, the libraries of the world would contain only a small fraction of what they contain today, because people without recognized achievement in a certain area wouldn’t be allowed to write on the subject of that particular area. Theodor W. Adorno for example, not really being a famous composer as far as I know, wouldn’t be allowed to write about music, now would he? Nor would George Bernard Shaw. Even Hans Keller would have to watch out, because all he managed as a musician was playing the violin and viola. Adorno, Shaw, Keller ... all of them laughable?
If you had your way, all discussions among amateurs and dilletantes (which often can prove quite interesting and illuminating) would have to stop at once. Journalists would only be permitted to write or report on topics concerning fields of endeavour in which they themselves have accomplished significant achievements.

And who will decide what qualifies as an significant achievement? You? Or some committee somewhere? And what amount of success is required before opinion is allowed? And is the opinion of a composer with two Oscars to his name automatically more interesting than the opinion of a composer with only one Oscar? Because that is basically what you’re saying, isn’t it? And ... are you yourself a successful enough composer to have earned to right to express an opinion on the subject of music? I.o.w. does what you have accomplished, suffice? Just asking, you know.

Not that every opinion expressed is of equal importance or interest (determining that is an entirely subjective matter), but the right to express an opinion is a most fundamental one nonetheless, it seems to me.
Everyone here has the right to say that composer X sucks or that composer Y is great. It’s up to you to decide which opinions you value and which you don’t, but please, don’t deny anyone his/her right to express it.

Come to think of it, if the right to formulate an opinion on a certain subject has to be coupled to significant achievements in that area, how come you seem to have no problem sharing your views with us on things like sample libraries, audio plugins and other music software? Ever created any of these things?

Well, then.

_


----------



## EastWest Lurker

re-peat @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Typical exchange on forums:
> Poster A says, "That guy and/or his work sucks."
> Poster B: "But he accomplished Great Thing A, Great Thing B, and Great Thing C and worked with Great Artist A, Great Artist B, and Great Artist C and you have not done any of that."
> Poster A: "I don't care, it is my opinion and my opinion is as good as anyone else's, even guys who have done Great Thing B, and Great Thing C and worked with Great Artist A, Great Artist B, and Great Artist C."
> 
> It's laughable, frankly.
> 
> 
> 
> No it isn’t. It is, with permission, you who are laughable in being unable to disconnect the quality of an opinion of a person from the recognition of his/her achievements. If you had your way, the libraries of the world would contain only a small fraction of what they contain today, because people without recognized achievement in a certain area wouldn’t be allowed to write on the subject of that particular area. Theodor W. Adorno for example, not really being a famous composer as far as I know, wouldn’t be allowed to write about music, now would he? Nor would George Bernard Shaw. Even Hans Keller would have to watch out, because all he managed as a musician was playing the violin and viola. Adorno, Shaw, Keller ... all of them laughable?
> If you had your way, all discussions among amateurs and dilletantes (which often can prove quite interesting and illuminating) would have to stop at once. Journalists would only be permitted to write or report on topics concerning fields of endeavour in which they themselves have accomplished significant achievements.
> 
> And who will decide what qualifies as an significant achievement? You? Or some committee somewhere? And what amount of success is required before opinion is allowed? And is the opinion of a composer with two Oscars to his name automatically more interesting than the opinion of a composer with only one Oscar? Because that is basically what you’re saying, isn’t it? And ... are you yourself a successful enough composer to have earned to right to express an opinion on the subject of music? I.o.w. does what you have accomplished, suffice? Just asking, you know.
> 
> Not that every opinion expressed is of equal importance or interest (determining that is an entirely subjective matter), but the right to express an opinion is a most fundamental one nonetheless, it seems to me.
> Everyone here has the right to say that composer X sucks or that composer Y is great. It’s up to you to decide which opinions you value and which you don’t, but please, don’t deny anyone his/her right to express it.
> 
> Come to think of it, if the right to formulate an opinion on a certain subject has to be coupled to significant achievements in that area, how come you seem to have no problem sharing your views with us on things like sample libraries, audio plugins and other music software? Ever created any of these things?
> 
> Well, then.
> 
> _
Click to expand...


I will ignore the personal attack (and there is always a personal attack when you disagree somehow) and deal with your questions.

History decides what qualifies as "significant achievement" and I submit that history has already decided that Spielberg is one of the great directors.

No, 2 Oscars vs 1 is not a critical difference but i.e. 2 Oscars vs composing in your bedroom in your parent's house, IS. In my experience, " discussions among amateurs and dilletantes" rarely prove "quite interesting and illuminating", far more often they are college dorm level b.s. 

But no I would not ban them. 

What astounds me on the internet is this seeming almost _need_ to be critical of successful people and products, as if it makes the poster somehow more when actually, it makes them less.

90% of what I post publicly about other musicians and products is positive. Does that mean I think 90% of all musicians and products are great? Of course not. But the world does not benefit from me spreading negative comments about people or products like a cow spreading manure, which is what many on the internet now do.

Does everyone have the right to do this? Sure. Do I want to ban it? No. Do I want to discourage it? You betcha!

Because one can does not mean one should. Liberty is not license.


----------



## poseur

but,
has anyone here ever listened to this recording of *tigran mansurian*'s string quartets, yet,
and been moved by and/or enjoyed it?


----------



## rayinstirling

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> 90% of what I post publicly about other musicians and products is positive. Does that mean I think 90% of all musicians and products are great? Of course not. But the world does not benefit from me spreading negative comments about people or products like a cow spreading manure, which is what many on the internet now do.



You said "Welcome to the embracing of the death of craft, folks. Anyone can score a film and it does not matter if they actually know what they are doing as long as with tools they can get it done."

May we assume this was you being positive?


----------



## EastWest Lurker

rayinstirling @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 90% of what I post publicly about other musicians and products is positive. Does that mean I think 90% of all musicians and products are great? Of course not. But the world does not benefit from me spreading negative comments about people or products like a cow spreading manure, which is what many on the internet now do.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You said "Welcome to the embracing of the death of craft, folks. Anyone can score a film and it does not matter if they actually know what they are doing as long as with tools they can get it done."
> 
> May we assume this was you being positive?
Click to expand...


Did I single out anyone specifically for criticism?


----------



## re-peat

Jay,

You carefully avoided the more difficult questions, haven’t you? I’ll ask again: Adorno laughable? Shaw’s writings on music also laughable?
And history decides what qualifies as significant achiement, you say. Okay. So does that mean none of us is allowed to discuss current subject matter and/or contemporary composers? (Except to praise them.) And how many years exactly need to have passed before this ‘history’ of yours sets in? Can we already discuss, say, Thomas Newman or do we still have to wait a few more years? And has history already decided on Jon Brion or not? Please tell us. (I dare to ask because maybe, just maybe, you have an NDA with History as well, as you already seem to be completely sure what History's verdict on Spielberg will be.)

And I’m still unclear about your distinction between critical and non-critical differences. What is that? The distance between one and two Oscars is non-critical, and the difference between two Oscars and the bedroom is critical. Okay, let’s assume it is. At which point exactly then does it go from non-critical to critical? Regional recognition? Stateswide recognition? One Grammy? Five Grammy’s? And again: who decides these things? 

And positive views are more allowed than negative ones, yes? The world benefits more, as you say, from a positive view of Kirk Hunter’s libraries than from a negative one? Right? People praising EastWest get more room to say their piece than people questioning it. Is that it? 

Seriously, don’t you see how ridiculous, snobby, pretentious and, ultimately, fascist this all is?

You see, what I find astounding in your thinking is your view that ONLY success validates opinion and, even more incomprehensible, that success automatically means quality. I mean, to consider a successful person’s opinions more valid and respectable than a less successful person’s, only because there’s a ‘critical difference in recognition’ (whatever that means), and completely disregarding the actual content of the respective opinons … That, to me, is laughable, yes. Very much so in fact.

_


----------



## lux

Success has a consistent percentage of luck involved. Looks like a poor validating method for ones opinion.

I have to say though that sometimes I avoid being extremely negative when writing (and not speaking) as I happen to change my mind. My taste varies. I dont really have one solid and unbreakable opinion. I learn, emotively too. Sometimes i value things which I completely miss at a first listen. Stuff like that. Being directly and ultimately negative makes me feel a bit dull. A bit stupid. 

I happen to be negative and destructive while speaking though, at times. Its more of a fun thing. It doesnt leave trace.


----------



## RiffWraith

Oh my God Almighty In Heaven.

Why is it that nearly every time Jay joins a conversation, it inevetably at some point goes to shit? :roll:


----------



## EastWest Lurker

re-peat @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> Jay,
> 
> You carefully avoided the more difficult questions, haven’t you? I’ll ask again: Adorno laughable? Shaw’s writings on music also laughable?
> And history decides what qualifies as significant achiement, you say. Okay. So does that mean none of us is allowed to discuss current subject matter and/or contemporary composers? (Except to praise them.) And how many years exactly need to have passed before this ‘history’ of yours sets in? Can we already discuss, say, Thomas Newman or do we still have to wait a few more years? And has history already decided on Jon Brion or not? Please tell us. (I dare to ask because maybe, just maybe, you have an NDA with History as well, as you already seem to be completely sure what History's verdict on Spielberg will be.)
> 
> And I’m still unclear about your distinction between critical and non-critical differences. What is that? The distance between one and two Oscars is non-critical, and the difference between two Oscars and the bedroom is critical. Okay, let’s assume it is. At which point exactly then does it go from non-critical to critical? Regional recognition? Stateswide recognition? One Grammy? Five Grammy’s? And again: who decides these things?
> 
> And positive views are more allowed than negative ones, yes? A positive view of Kirk Hunter’s libraries is more acceptable than a negative one? Right? People praising EastWest get more room to say their piece than people questioning it. Is that it?
> 
> Don’t you see how ridiculous (and ultimately: fascist) this all is?
> 
> You see, what I find extremely strange in your thinking is your view that ONLY success validates opinion and, even more incomprehensible, that success automatically means quality. I mean, to consider a successful person’s opinions more valid and respectable than a less successful person’s, only because there’s a ‘critical difference in recognition’ (whatever that means), and completely disregarding the actual content of the respective opinons … That, to me, is laughable, yes. Very much so in fact.
> 
> _



Shaw;'s writings on music are readable because he was a great writer and knowledgeable about music. Nonetheless, if he disagreed with Harold Schonberg, I am going to give more weight to Schonberg.

I am not saying "ONLY success validates opinion". What I AM saying is that in one's own code of contact, ONLY success should make you feel OK about publicly dumping on successful people.

But the reality is by and large, successful people DON"T do that because they are too busy working at what they are successful at. Most of the more successful people here, like Colin, Craig, Jeff C., etc. almost never do this. Coincidence? I don't think so.

Anyway, I am well aware that my approach to this is the byproduct of having been raised in a different generation where the concepts of respect are very different that what now prevails, so I am Quixotic in this I know. So I will try to let it go, as you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him boogaloo.

it just irritates the crap out of me however to see like Spielberg who have given the world so many beloved films and Michael Kamen who did so many terrific scores dissed by people so much lesser.


----------



## Ed

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> Shaw;'s writings on music are readable because he was a great writer and knowledgeable about music. Nonetheless, if he disagreed with Harold Schonberg, I am going to give more weight to Schonberg.
> 
> I am not saying "ONLY success validates opinion". What I AM saying is that in one's own code of contact, ONLY success should make you feel OK about publicly dumping on successful people.




You know maybe I'd agree with you more if you didnt seem so inconsistent. How many times do you defend people that hate on Zimmer and all those people making a success of themselves writing music with that same kind of attitude towards music as he does, in these kinds of threads. According to you, people like Guy Bacos really aught to shut up because Hans is successful and therefore deserves respect necessarily by the very nature of him being successful and popular. 

In some ways I agree with this, but its clearly also nonsense that you dont even agree with. Plenty of pop songs are absolutely terrible but also very popular. You will Im sure agree with that but Im sure you will have no qualms in making your opinion known that it is bad. But if we are to use your logic, what right do you have to say its bad? So long as its popular and they are successful, we can't say. Point is you only seem to get upset and use this argument when someone remarks against a composer *YOU *happen to like. 

Bottom line, you are inconsistent and contradictory. Aren't we all though in some ways, right? But at least I feel like Im rational enough to accept and notice when I am.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

Ed @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shaw;'s writings on music are readable because he was a great writer and knowledgeable about music. Nonetheless, if he disagreed with Harold Schonberg, I am going to give more weight to Schonberg.
> 
> I am not saying "ONLY success validates opinion". What I AM saying is that in one's own code of contact, ONLY success should make you feel OK about publicly dumping on successful people.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You know maybe I'd agree with you more if you didnt seem so inconsistent. How many times do you defend people that hate on Zimmer and all those people making a success of themselves writing music with that same kind of attitude towards music as he does in these kinds of threads. According to you, people like Guy Bacos really aught to shut up because Hans is successful and therefore deserves respect necessarily.
> 
> In some ways I agree with this, but its clearly also nonsense that you dont even agree with. Plenty of pop songs are absolutely terrible but also very popular. You will Im sure agree with that but Im sure you will have no qualms in making your opinion known that it is bad. What right do you have to say its bad, if its popular?
> 
> Bottom like, you are inconsistent and contradictory. Aren't we all though in some ways, right? But at least I feel like Im rational enough to accept and notice when I am
Click to expand...


Actually I HAVE criticized those who bash Zimmer. He doesn't deserve the level of disrespect he receives. He has done some great scores and probably has already earned a respected spot in film music history.

Great pop music, like the Beatles, endure. Bad pop music generally does not, Once again, history makes its judgements.

And sure, I can be inconsistent at times, I'm human, but actually you will rarely see criticize a specific pop artist/band. More often, you will see me write about what I like.


----------



## poseur

old & pretty deeply-worn arguments.
does anyone's pre-existing perspective actually change, as a result thereof?
i have no idea; really, i don't.
though i'm not a pessimist, per sé.

all opinions get weighed;
sometimes we employ a fair number of tools, for the weighing,
sometimes..... not.

sometimes, the experienced & professional dude or dudesse can be absolutely clueless via rigidifications,
while the enthusiast or hobbyist can be absolutely spot-on,
precisely because they might be more open.

other times, it can roll the other way.

the experienced & professional dude or dudesse might offer something of remarkable value,
while the enthusiast or hobbyist's lack-of-experience might not be able to parse that value,
occasionally due to the experiences-that-haven't-occurred, for them, yet,
and a whole 'nother version of rigidifications.

whoever you are:
use your own judgment.
and, maybe:
don't forget to apply it more mightily to your own musical self than to that of others, first.

there are musicians who're not professionals (and are, even, self-educated),
whose general opinions on music i might consider more than those of successful pro-folks like, say:
john williams, hans zimmer.
(please do note well that these are both composers whom,
in their own ways, have my utmost respect..... though, i do not wish to either _be_ or _be-like_ either of them.)

in fact:
there are even music critics whose opinions i might consider with more weight than those
of many fellow musicians & composers;
hell, when it comes to my music, my wife is my greatest critic.....
because i know the depth of her feelings for music,
and that she's incredibly well-exposed to so much much, beyond any self-limiting idioms, styles & contexts:
iow, her feelings for music aren't isolated to only that music which she might feel she "understands".

so.
not saying anything, again, here.
i'm in between cues, again,
on what's proven to be a(nother) pretty hellish little film.....
that's 2 rough ones in a row, for me.
so it ever goes.....


----------



## EastWest Lurker

poseur @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> and, maybe:
> don't forget to apply it more mightily to your own musical self than to that of others, first.



This may well be IMHO the best advice anyone has ever given on this forum, poseur.


----------



## re-peat

EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> Shaw's writings on music are readable because he was a great writer and knowledgeable about music. Nonetheless, if he disagreed with Harold Schonberg, I am going to give more weight to Schonberg. (...)
> It just irritates the crap out of me however to see like Spielberg who have given the world so many beloved films and Michael Kamen who did so many terrific scores dissed by people so much lesser.



Jay,

Sorry to keep troubling you with this, but I'm really interested in how this unfolds.

So you accept that an amateur (I use the word in its most positive and affectionate meaning, by the way) can still be knowledgeable about areas in which he/she doesn’t have any success? Right. So if that same amateur is capable of expressing himself/herself eloquently, like Shaw was, you’re willing to take him/her seriously … that is, until some other amateur (Schonberg) comes along who’s achievements you consider, for whatever arbitrary reason, more impressive. 

Very puzzling, I must say. Because, talking about Harold Schonberg: what exactly did he ever compose for you to take him more seriously than Shaw? As far as I know, he never composed a thing. So, on what basis do you rate Schonberg’s opinions on music higher than Shaw’s? Neither of them composers, both of them very knowledgeable on music though … what exactly is it that makes you go with Schonberg?

Oh, and something else about Schonberg: you do know he was extremely critical of Leonard Bernstein, don’t you? Leonard Bernstein, the _amazingly successful_ composer, conductor, teacher, writer and tv-personality. Schonberg seriously questioned Bernstein's capabilities, and never failed to say so. You consider this permissible, or is it an unpleasant flaw in Schonberg? Please answer.

And why, I wonder, do you deny Kay’s opinion on Spielberg? How much cinematographic success does Kays have to gather before you'll grant him the right to say something about Spielberg _that doesn’t conform with what you consider to be the established view_? (This last element, the bit printed in italics, that’s the real problem, isn’t it? You finding it difficult to cope with opinions that deviate from the commonly accepted.) Kays will have to do even better than Gilliam, I take it, because you even have serious difficulty with what he has to say about Spielberg.

The thing that seriously stinks here, Jay, if you allow me, is this: if Gilliam had been positive about Spielberg, you would never have questioned his reputation as a director, would you? You’d even have praised his achievements, I’m sure. But now that he says something about Spielberg _which you don’t agree with_, all of a sudden Gilliam is a director of limited capabilities and minor accomplishments.

All of which leads me nicely to my final question (and I’m really curious how you’ll answer this one): do the same requirements apply for positive opinions than for negative ones? I mean, suppose I say Bacharach sucks, you’d immediately ask to see my resumé and successful accomplishments in the field of pop music, wouldn’t you? But if say Bacharach’s great, you’d ask nothing of the sort and you wouldn’t be annoyed with me at all for expressing an opinion, right?
From which I can only deduce that positive opinions — or put less hypocritically: opinions which you deem acceptable — require no success or ‘critically recognized achievements’ at all, whereas negative opinions do. Care to explain the, in my opinion rather weird, logic in this?

Thanks in advance (and I mean this) for your answers.

_


----------



## dcoscina

I think we have to attempt to diverge from lumping orchestral musical integrity in with film scoring which is open to many genres, styles, approaches, and is largely a product guaged for mass consumption. Pop music and art music have always been separated though time has a way of re evaluating what was initially thought as pop music and re assigned it to art music- I'm sure Korngold's music or Tiomkin's or Steiner or Rosza's music wasn't well regarded in those days. It was looked upon as pastiche of late 19th century romanticism and poo-poo'd by academia. But as film scoring has matured, those scores are now looked upon as high water marks for musicality even if they seem very hokey as far as their effect on the film is perceived by audiences today.


----------



## EastWest Lurker

re-peat @ Wed Dec 28 said:


> EastWest Lurker @ Wed Dec 28 said:
> 
> 
> 
> Shaw's writings on music are readable because he was a great writer and knowledgeable about music. Nonetheless, if he disagreed with Harold Schonberg, I am going to give more weight to Schonberg. (...)
> It just irritates the crap out of me however to see like Spielberg who have given the world so many beloved films and Michael Kamen who did so many terrific scores dissed by people so much lesser.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jay,
> 
> Sorry to keep troubling you with this, but I'm really interested in how this unfolds.
> 
> So you accept that an amateur (I use the word in its most positive and affectionate meaning, by the way) can still be knowledgeable about areas in which he/she doesn’t have any success? Right. So if that same amateur is capable of expressing himself/herself eloquently, like Shaw was, you’re willing to take him/her seriously … that is, until some other amateur (Schonberg) comes along who’s achievements you consider, for whatever arbitrary reason, more impressive.
> 
> Very puzzling, I must say.
> 
> Talking about Harold Schonberg: what exactly did he ever compose for you to take him more seriously than Shaw? As far as I know, he never composed a thing. So, on what basis do you rate Schonberg’s opinions on music higher than Shaw’s? Neither of them composers, both of them very knowledgeable on music though … what exactly is it that makes you go with Schonberg?
> 
> Oh, and something else about Schonberg: you do know he was extremely critical of Leonard Bernstein, don’t you? Leonard Bernstein, the _amazingly successful_ composer, conductor, teacher, writer and tv-personality. Schonberg seriously questioned Bernstein's capabilities, and never failed to say so. You consider this permissible, or is it an unpleasant flaw in Schonberg? Please answer.
> 
> And why, I wonder, do you deny Kay’s opinion on Spielberg? How much cinematographic success does Kays have to gather before you'll grant him the right to say something about Spielberg _that doesn’t conform with what you consider to be the established view_? (This last element, the bit printed in italics, that’s the real problem, isn’t it? You finding it difficult to cope with opinions that deviate from the commonly accepted.) Kays will have to do even better than Gilliam, I take it, because you even have serious difficulty with what he has to say about Spielberg.
> 
> The thing that seriously stinks here, is this: if Gilliam had been positive about Spielberg, you would never have questioned his reputation as a director, would you? You’d even have praised his achievements, I’m sure. But now that he says something about Spielberg _which you don’t agree with_, all of a sudden Gilliam is a director of limited capabilities and minor accomplishments.
> 
> All of which leads me nicely to my final question (and I’m really curious how you’ll answer this one): do the same requirements apply for positive opinions than for negative ones? I mean, suppose I say Bacharach sucks, you’ll immediately ask to see my resumé and successful accomplishments in the field of pop music, wouldn’t you? But if say Bacharach’s great, you’d ask nothing of the sort and you wouldn’t be annoyed with me at all for expressing an opinion, right?
> From which I can only deduce that positive opinions — or put less hypocritically: opinions which you deem acceptable — require no success or ‘critically recognized achievements’ at all, whereas negative opinions do. Care to explain the, in my opinion rather weird, logic in this?
> 
> Thanks in advance (and I mean this) for your answers.
> 
> _
Click to expand...


OK, Piet, let me try to give this the thoughtful response it deserves and let me acknowledge right up front that I may be inconsistent at times, because I'm human.

1. Schonberg was perhaps an amateur composer but he was not an amateur music historian. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_C._Schonberg
Musicology training is a very valid background for critiquing music,

2. I think history has decided that Bernstein was a great conductor, great teacher, and great composer for musicals but as a concert hall composer, really only a couple of his pieces are widely admired and in that arena I think he is considered a bit of an underachiever. Also, in "The Unanswered Question" series of lectures he gave at Harvard he took a giant dump on atonal composers that damaged him in the eyes of some. OTOH, maybe Schonberg is just wrong in his evaluation or at least arguably wrong. No one bats 100%.

3. Perhaps Kays, who I consider a friend btw, should make one really good film before he publicly denigrates Spielberg. Just sayin' 

4. Actually I would have said nothing one way or the other about Gilliam. I don't have strong feelings about his work one way or another. And I don't think I described him as "a director of limited capabilities and minor accomplishments" did I? I just said he was not in the same league with Spielberg.

5. Yes, you are right, in my view, saying something positive about someone who has achieved great success requires no success or recognized achievements to be accepted. There is no shortage of negative comments, just a shortage of positive comments. I am all for praising that which we love, whether I agree or not. And maybe you will indeed find that weird but I am comfortable with it conceptually.


----------



## re-peat

Okay, Jay, thanks very much. It was a satisfying discussion. And I do apologize if you feel I sometimes veered towards the personal attacks along the way. (I was a bit surprised reading you say that though, because this time, I wasn't aware of it all and I'm not in that kinda mood at the moment. Even so, I'm sorry.)

Thanks again!

_


----------



## EastWest Lurker

You are welcome, I enjoyed it as well.


----------



## jlb

Jay, I was with you 100% on this conversation. You hit a nerve with some of the people on here. I also won't hear a bad word about Michael Kamen, I thought he was a wonderful composer.

jlb


----------



## EastWest Lurker

jlb @ Thu Dec 29 said:


> Jay, I was with you 100% on this conversation. You hit a nerve with some of the people on here. I also won't hear a bad word about Michael Kamen, I thought he was a wonderful composer.
> 
> jlb



Thank you. Like all composers who did as many scores as he did, he had better and lesser scores but he left this earth with an impressive body of work IMHO.


----------

