# Busy soundtracks vs a minimalist approach



## JonnyB12 (Mar 23, 2014)

Having read Jeff Rona's fabulous book, 'The Reel World' - there is a section about slimming your tracks down and not making them too busy so that it doesn't suck up too much audience attention, and doesn't compete with the sound effects - and yet, for example, John Williams' score to Indiana Jones and the temple of doom is incredibly busy (has to be my favorite score of all time).

Do you know any examples of scores where the 'busy-ness' enhances the film, or vice versa? Do you get asked to slim your scores down, or to add more detail?


----------



## Daryl (Mar 23, 2014)

There are lots of differing opinions on this issue. However, suffice it to say that Williams is primarily writing music, and it just so happens that this music works with picture. He is not in the business of writing the most simple drones and loops so as not to get in the way. Not that there is anything wrong with this approach, but firstly it seems to suit TV better than movies, and secondly it treats music primarily as sound design, rather than music.

One more thought. The better the music, the better the dubbing engineer has to be to make it work. :wink: 

D


----------



## JonnyB12 (Mar 23, 2014)

Daryl @ Sun Mar 23 said:


> One more thought. The better the music, the better the dubbing engineer has to be to make it work. :wink:
> 
> D



Wasn't it Korngold where they had to cut around his music? Such was the respect they had for him!

On the subject of TV music does anyone remember the old 1980s Inspector Morse series? Not sure if it went worldwide but was very popular here in the UK at the time. Very minimalist score by Barrington Pheolong (sp?) but very haunting and appropriate, lots of long sustained string passages all the way through.


----------



## Daryl (Mar 23, 2014)

bazhorn @ Sun Mar 23 said:


> Daryl @ Sun Mar 23 said:
> 
> 
> > One more thought. The better the music, the better the dubbing engineer has to be to make it work. :wink:
> ...


Yes, but he was really a special case, I think.

D


----------



## KEnK (Mar 23, 2014)

Film history is ripe w/ examples-

Silvestri
Goldsmith
Morricone
Herrmann
Nino Rota wrote simply but also powerfully
His theme's became part of the story.
Lord of the Ring's is that way too

Personally not a fan of the current a-musical drone approach.
It actually takes me out of the picture-
As does the shaky cam thing

k


----------



## SimonCharlesHanna (Mar 23, 2014)

bazhorn @ Sun 23 Mar said:


> Having read Jeff Rona's fabulous book, 'The Reel World' - there is a section about slimming your tracks down and not making them too busy so that it doesn't suck up too much audience attention, and doesn't compete with the sound effects - and yet, for example, John Williams' score to Indiana Jones and the temple of doom is incredibly busy (has to be my favorite score of all time).
> 
> Do you know any examples of scores where the 'busy-ness' enhances the film, or vice versa? Do you get asked to slim your scores down, or to add more detail?



You're approaching this the wrong way


----------



## JonnyB12 (Mar 23, 2014)

Eh?


----------



## AlexandreSafi (Mar 23, 2014)

There's always the danger of overwriting, which I think Hans Zimmer & James Newton Howard are currently the two great masters at NOT doing, that art in itself is way underrated, and takes a lot of soul, when done right, but also a lot of gut when making blockbuster movies especially,... 

but then the big thing is...there is also the need for the craft of film scoring so that you know how to create and make every note count no matter how many notes there are or not, because the ultimate goal is understanding that the movie (images mainly) dictates the notes, the amount of them, the tempo/rhythm, the harmonies (the amount of them too), the sounds, well the attitude of the music...

To me, at least, it's not just John Williams, his style, and his "many" notes, but the big movies he made in his time, precisely yet elusively, required that virtuosity (unlike his other Spielberg:"Munich" for example, anyone?)... 

Now i think one can also be a "busy" note-maker, while still not making it run all over the place which, in the wrong context, could take away the seriousness or element of danger sometimes, but that needs understanding of what it is you're doing orchestration-wise, and again, not falling into the trap of treating your music as something that all it wants is to impress and get adoration, and start becoming separate from the movie...

If it's great, then let time & people separate that from the movie...

Alexandre


----------



## AC986 (Mar 23, 2014)

bazhorn @ Sun Mar 23 said:


> Do you know any examples of scores where the 'busy-ness' enhances the film, or vice versa? Do you get asked to slim your scores down, or to add more detail?



Loads.

Michael Nyman for instance can be minimalist and busy at the same time. This works. All depends on the film and whether dialogue is more important than the visuals and so on.
You can hear it drop when the narrator speaks and then they bring it up again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jshPPVOJDb8


----------



## JonnyB12 (Mar 23, 2014)

I think perhaps Michael Nyman's scoring experience is slightly different from normal as he himself stated re. Peter Greenaway - 'Peter usually worked from my pre-existing music. He also loves the challenge of the film-making and composing process running in tandem together, like John Cage and Merce Cunningham working on the same piece simultaneously. The one film of Peter's that was finished before I wrote the music was Drowning by Numbers, and Peter thinks it suffers because of that.' 

And just to clarify, I wasn't referring to Minimalist music a la Nyman and Glass in the title - I just meant the opposite of busy - really poor wording on my part! Sorry!


----------



## H.R. (Mar 23, 2014)

I think it's just the matter of opinion but I love this quote from Hans Zimmer: "I've spent my life trying to make things simpler. Because I find ultimately that complicated doesn't reach the heart"


----------



## Jacob Cadmus (Mar 23, 2014)

It really depends on the project you're working on. If you approach it as a filmmaker, more so than a musician, then you'd be naturally compelled to do whatever complements the film. If it means to do simple drones, loops, chords, etc., then so be it. The result may not be as musically intelligent as you hoped it would be, but in context it sounds ingenious. The trick is to know how to paint broad strokes within the limited headroom you are given.

I think one of the worst things a film composer could do is write music for the sake of writing music. It's a selfish and narrow-minded way of going about a project.


----------



## H.R. (Mar 24, 2014)

Jacob Cadmus @ Sun Mar 23 said:


> I think one of the worst things a film composer could do is write music for the sake of writing music. It's a selfish and narrow-minded way of going about a project.



َAbsolutely right and it requires good understanding of screenplay and the film itself. Sometimes people like Gustavo Santaolalla compose only with pictures and references of the film and yet they capture everything.


----------



## Jaap (Mar 24, 2014)

I always hate it when they put so much film around my music!!

Kidding aside. I prefer effective scoring where at the end of the movie you talk about the movie. If the soundtrack was too good I would talk about about the music, if it was to bad I would talk about it also. If it was perfectly balanced, I talk about the movie.

It doesnt matter in balance scores if the music is busy or minimal for me. Balanced doesn't mean minimal. Alexander Desplat is a great example I think. His scores can be busy and minimal, but serve the movie and you notice the music and it is great, but it is not distracting at the moment.


----------

