# Is harmony dead in film music?



## JohnG (Sep 10, 2012)

Hi all,

I am wondering -- except for a handful of scores -- whether harmony, key changes, and a lot of other technique formerly associated with music, has really died a death in film music.

There are certainly some chords in some scores, such as John Carter, that hearken back to the past, but that score specifically had a kind of "period" hue to it owing to the fact that John Carter was supposed to be an American Civil War veteran. Naturally, there are exceptions; harmony is found in period pieces, some comedies, and children's films.

Overall when I listen to scores, particularly up-and-coming scores or scores set explicitly in the contemporary, I am not sure I'm hearing even chord changes a lot of the time, much less harmonic movement to new keys and so on.

Am I wrong, or is it just the case that, for the time being at least, these techniques are seen as corny and old-fashioned? Like woodwinds.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 10, 2012)

I get the feeling sometimes that in today's scene notes are overrated. But honestly I think it's a combination of two factors. Factor number one is composers that aren't comfortable with notes are having some successes and factor number 2 being that too many of us are too hung up on the past. What did happen rather than pushing harmony and melody in new directions.

For me personally, I just sat down one day and realized that the "new sound" is being generated by composers that don't know much in the way of music and that if I actually applied some music to the "new sound" that there might actually be something to that. Though I haven't done it yet. Mostly in the what if stages. But, I just watched the film Safe House and I was thinking that some of the sounds are pretty cool and it wouldn't be too hard to put some harmonic movement in the thumping synth bass, ect... No need for that bass to be thumping on the same note for 3 minutes!!!

In the end though after giving it much thought I realized that a lot of the "contemporary" scores aren't really worth the digital bits they're printed on. They won't last. Nobody remembers them. Just background filler. Maybe that's what the film makers wanted, but something just tells me that it's what they settled for not knowing any better, and that if presented with better more intelligent higher quality music they would go for it as long as it didn't make their movie sound old fashion. Unless of course old fashion is what they're going for. And imo there's nothing wrong with a traditional score.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 10, 2012)

Maybe it's also a question of, a) the directors not having the same musical background as those of the previous generation; and b) in their search for uniqueness/breaking from the past, they have nixed music that sounded like scores from the past (you couldn't go with more complicated harmony/melodies, so the other direction was taken).


----------



## José Herring (Sep 10, 2012)

But today we're being bludgeoned by musical philistines that just wield a bigger and badder sound as the solution to everything. And, I just decided after trying to "go along" that in the end, if I'm not happy with what I'm doing, then all the money in the world won't make up for it. And, I have to believe that if we're truly honest to our own uniqueness that someday the right project will come along and will be a huge success. At least that keeps me getting up in the morning.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 10, 2012)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> Maybe it's also a question of, a) the directors not having the same musical background as those of the previous generation; and b) in their search for uniqueness/breaking from the past, they have nixed music that sounded like scores from the past (you couldn't go with more complicated harmony/melodies, so the other direction was taken).



It is true, but it's a fine line between simple and stupid.


----------



## rpaillot (Sep 10, 2012)

Complex harmony, chords changes / key changes and cool synth / electronic sounds are not really compatible...

There is a reason why most electronic / hybrid cues from contemporary scores 
stay on the same bass pedal note from the beginning to the end = Try doing complex bass and chord movements with a cool bass loop sound and it's inevitably going to sound either weird or cheesy...(or sounds like a dance song ) 
thats why you rarely hear bass change or chord change . Or you can sometimes hear chords progression but very slowly and often when I hear that in those hybrid cues, there's still a "feeling" of a pedal note in the whole harmony.

Try doing a B7sus4 with a pad, and it's going to sound muddy or sounds like an old sci fi movie from the 70s... :lol:


----------



## rgames (Sep 10, 2012)

JohnG @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> Hi all,
> 
> I am wondering -- except for a handful of scores -- whether harmony, key changes, and a lot of other technique formerly associated with music, has really died a death in film music.


Might even want to add melody to that list - it's becoming a rarity, as well.

It seems like film music is doing what classical music did in the early/mid 20th century - move away from music in the traditional sense and into something more akin to a combination of music and sound design. I guess it's still music, but not exactly my cup of tea. Perhaps I'm too musically unsophisticated to appreciate the trend.

The difference for film music is that it (probably) won't drive people away from movie theaters like it drove them away from concert halls.

There are still good scores being written and produced. There might even be more good scores now than ever before but it seems like fewer because there are so many more bad scores. It's kind of like the Internet phenomenon: democratizing the ability to be heard doesn't create more good ideas, just more noise.

rgames


----------



## sherief83 (Sep 10, 2012)

I think the real answer is no one knows how things are going in the future. I think we go into periods where some techniques and forms get dropped and then picked up again and then disappear and then reappear in new forms. 

I do understand any composer's worry when they geared all their musical self to perfecting tricks of harmony to use on films only to find they can't use them anymore.

I feel that you shouldn't rely or take anything for granted in the film scoring scene and as a film composer, you should be ready to grow and explore your self in all forms of music. 

but at the same time, Just because your well experienced in using woodwinds and they might be out of favors now doesn't mean that its impossible for someone(might be you!) to find a way to make them the thing again. 

You just never know really, but if it comes back, guess who knows a thing or a two about woodwinds?..lol

I also think that any experiences you gained writing key changes and harmony tricks is well worth it and be proud that you can. 

Those techniques are very effective and almost always shine when you work with a director that is comfortable with music speaking what words can't speak. its an extremely powerful way of expression in film and not anyone can do it effectively. maybe thats why everyone is going towards ambiguous music so they don't have to deal with it.

I feel that there is no such thing as old fashioned. its just a game of too much and not enough. ok too many composers use orchestra? time to use ambiguous music. Too many composers are using ambiguous music? time to use some melody and harmonies. No style survives more than 5 to 10 years really and their is always a new way of expression and change thats always effective.

Ok I need to stop because its a deep subject that I can just sit here and talk for hours on it.


----------



## gsilbers (Sep 10, 2012)

so let me get this straight...

film music NEEDS to have (complex) harmony and melody to be considered a filmscore? (or good filmscore?)
(seems like the general vibe im getting from the above posts. )

electronic music and musical sound design for filmscores somehow is less sofisticated and more "dumber" or forgetful? 


somehow this topic came up because "most" scores dont have complext harmony or melody ? 

i dont know how you'all see the world around you in entertainment context but 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_in_film

and from 2011 

http://www.imdb.com/search/title?sort=y ... =2011,2011

7000+ titles!!! 

there is way more "classical" type scores in there than hyrbid/electronic. and who knows about the harmony and melody since getting a real answer from a semi grey area subject seems imposible. 

not sure what exactly these type of posts are.. is it snobbism ? anxiety from changes? lack of knowledge? self assurance? 

to me its just a different taste. same deal with techno and hiphop in the commercial side. its just different, stylistic choice that sometimes works eaither way.. classical score can cheapen a movie or make it excell and same as with electronic scores or scores with no complex harmony or strong melody. 

have any director/producer has told you to not go too complex on harmony or have a strong melody? or is it because of lack of time? i guess if u continue to do complex harmony and complex scores along with non hyrbid/electronic then it will be yuor sound and directors will dig that and get you hired if he doesnt want those hyrbid simple scores.


----------



## FredrikJonasson (Sep 10, 2012)

josejherring @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> In the end though after giving it much thought I realized that a lot of the "contemporary" scores aren't really worth the digital bits they're printed on.



I don't know exactly what music you mean, but I don't believe this. I don't want to believe it either 
On my university, the music that the composition students write often sounds waaay to weird and over intellectualized to my ears, but I'd never say that it isn't worth anything. All this music that's being written and performed is what has given us all the fantastic music out there. That we keep exploring. The mutation isn't always pretty, but it's worth it.


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 10, 2012)

You know film scores are in a bad spot when 21 Jump Street has the most thematically satisfying score this year.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 10, 2012)

choc0thrax @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> You know film scores are in a bad spot when 21 Jump Street has the most thematically satisfying score this year.



I had the same realization when I rather enjoyed the score to Kick Ass. It had harmony.

So I say write the music you want. If nobody digs it than at least you can go to your grave with the satisfaction of knowing that you did something that you thought was worthwhile.


----------



## MikeH (Sep 10, 2012)

gsilbers @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> classical score can cheapen a movie or make it excell and same as with electronic scores or scores with no complex harmony or strong melody.




I'm all for a level playing field, but can you honestly give examples where a classical score cheapened a movie?





gsilbers @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> have any director/producer has told you to not go too complex on harmony or have a strong melody?



Absolutely. Many times.


----------



## passenger57 (Sep 10, 2012)

Honesty, the scores in most big budget movies bore me to tears. Just sounds like Inception mixed with some sound design and stuffer fx staccato strings. I don't even remember when I came out of a theatre recently wanting to buy a soundtrack. 
For the low budget scores I do, I'm guilty of it sometimes where they want that sort of sound. But I at least try and get a melody in there so the score has some soul and I feel connected to it.

Usually the scores I like best are the little quirky indies movies where the composer scores it with an old analog synth, broken cello, a piece of lettuce, and a toothpick. :lol:


----------



## adg21 (Sep 10, 2012)

---


----------



## dcoscina (Sep 10, 2012)

Jonny Greenwood's score to The Master has woodwinds and harmony! It's curious that one of the most innovative film composers is a rock musician (though he did have formal training on violin and is the composer in residence at the BBC). 

I actually feel bad for you guys who earn their living at composing music in these times. I hear more and more horror stories of having to jettison this melody or that harmony to appease tone deaf asshole MBA types. It must suck. 

I'm reconciled to composing for concert hall. I have a day job so I don't have to compromise my music principles in order to pay rent/mortgage, food, family, etc. I'm not being sarcastic about this either. I used to envy (and want) to be a film composer but the brief experiences I had in the late '90s with filmmakers left me disillusioned and almost hating music so I decided to give up that dream. Even then, I helped out a Hollywood composer scoring a documentary a year ago or so because he's a friend and I was only doing a few cues (although he liked what I was doing so much he asked me to write more!). We worked on the project for 6 months and then the director flaked out and that was the end of that. 

Anyhow sorry to digress. Some composers are still able to get away with all these great components of music composition but that's like John Williams.

I listened to The Matrix trilogy by Don Davis a week ago and I floored me with the amount of detail, design, and sheer brilliance of his approach. Yeah, some of it was second hand John Adams and Michael Torke but dammit, it was solid solid stuff. And it made a distinctive musical impression. Nowadays, the only thing that floors me is discovering composers like Lili Boulanger who have been dead for almost a century. 

Or something like John Corigliano's Edge of Darkness score which was wonderfully melodic but rejected in favor of a less exciting, bland Howard Shore score in his Se7en mode of writing....


----------



## passenger57 (Sep 10, 2012)

Agreed - The Matrix trilogy is great. I met Don at a special screening of the last film, a very nice, modest guy. You could pass him on the street and never know he was the person that created something that iconic and powerful. 
But back to the subject - If your working with a director that has a great knowledge and appreciation for film music and is able to articulate what they want, then your halfway there. I did a score for a director who was a huge Jerry Goldsmith fan. To say the least it was fun scoring his movie! Melodies, harmonies, I felt like a real composer for a change and not a sound designer.


----------



## Saxer (Sep 10, 2012)

i think one of the biggest reasons for non-harmonic music is the mockup world. to get budget for a real orchestra you have to convince with a mockup. and sample orchestras are best in rhythmic staccatos, pizzicatos and long notes but not in emotional melodies. and it sounds best with doubling tricks like accents with drums, basses with synths and background with textures.

my hope is the future in virtual instruments. in the last ten years the sample world developed in rapid speed to better quality and performance. and new libraries come out daily. some years to go and we can make beautiful melodic lines and harmonies will follow again. the next step is the possibility to compose for small sections and solo instruments without bombast but with taste and style.


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Sep 10, 2012)

cycles...everything goes in cycles. 

Saxer has a good point. Computers/machines helped speed up the music production process, but hurt melodic gestures. Machines are much better at rhythms than playing melodies,


----------



## José Herring (Sep 10, 2012)

FredrikJonasson @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> josejherring @ Mon Sep 10 said:
> 
> 
> > In the end though after giving it much thought I realized that a lot of the "contemporary" scores aren't really worth the digital bits they're printed on.
> ...



Just watch TV.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Sep 10, 2012)

Harmony = vocabulary.

Film = genre.

Flute = orchestration.

These are three separate issues. A composer is a _writer._ The more vocabulary you have, the more range you have to express yourself. 

A movie is not a concert work. It's a visually programmatic work. Thus you write for the demands of the movie. If a B7sus4 pad is out of place with the film, DON'T write it. You write for what the film needs. The more harmonic vocabulary you have, the greater the range you have to pick from. 

A top notch film composer is an aural dramatist of which orchestration is a partner WITH the harmony. The flute or other woodwinds sound one way in their respective low, medium, high, and very high ranges. And then that sound is dramatized by the harmony be it major, minor, modal, diminished, augmented,, altered, 12 Tone, etc.

There ARE old fashioned ideas about learning harmony and that's the child birthed by academia. 

$25. Schoenberg Theory of Harmony 100th Anniversary Edition. It's a composer's approach. You're always writing. Do the exercises with a sample library or two. Experiment. Record. Listen. Evaluate. 

To repeat: harmony = vocabulary.


----------



## Arbee (Sep 10, 2012)

dcoscina @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> I used to envy (and want) to be a film composer but the brief experiences I had in the late '90s with filmmakers left me disillusioned and almost hating music so I decided to give up that dream. Even then, I helped out a Hollywood composer scoring a documentary a year ago or so because he's a friend and I was only doing a few cues (although he liked what I was doing so much he asked me to write more!). We worked on the project for 6 months and then the director flaked out and that was the end of that ..


I had a similar experience in the early 90's with a similar decision not to chase film. In fact one of the sad things I've seen is to watch a highly talented recording musician and composer progressively lose his musical psyche over the past 20 years because he wanted so badly to be a hollywood film composer.


----------



## dcoscina (Sep 10, 2012)

Jimbo 88 @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> cycles...everything goes in cycles.
> 
> Saxer has a good point. Computers/machines helped speed up the music production process, but hurt melodic gestures. Machines are much better at rhythms than playing melodies,



Totally agree.


----------



## IvanP (Sep 11, 2012)

I think that, more than harmony, it's a question of effectively combining different techniques: orchestration, voice leading, counterpoint, natural dynamics, melodic writing, etc 

JNH uses IMO, a nice combination of modal-tonal harmony, but most of his voice leading seems to be heterophonic. 

Action movies seem to rely on Pedal and Ostinati

Drama seems to go into the minimal orchestration-textural vein, etc.

I guess the only genre where harmony can still be more exposed is in the fantasy-videogame genre...at least that's where I found me more able to do so...

Still, given the current film music hybrid "coolness", but me, being an advocate of Harmony and Cool symphonic vibe... I don't know if my music would sound outdated because of that...if anybody would like to comment, here's an example...would love to hear your comments in this matter  (sorry for highjacking)

https://vimeo.com/26369215 

(It goes full sort of Ravel from the second part of the video)


Ivan


----------



## Kejero (Sep 11, 2012)

Saxer @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> my hope is the future in virtual instruments. in the last ten years the sample world developed in rapid speed to better quality and performance. and new libraries come out daily. some years to go and we can make beautiful melodic lines and harmonies will follow again. the next step is the possibility to compose for small sections and solo instruments without bombast but with taste and style.



I love this theory. Hadn't thought about it, and it sounds like something that could happen.

I'm afraid the reality is less promising though. Cheap VSTi's have opened the world of scoring to thousands of enthousiasts who have no musical foundation, yet who are now able to press a few keys and record something that sounds good enough to create a mood. Many of these people are lazy and have no interest in putting in the hard work of study and experimentation. The power of these modern tools makes some of them think they are talented enough.

The truth is, today it IS possible to create amazingly realistic yet virtual melodies and harmonies. The examples are out there. They are few, but each and everyone that I have heard sounded great and realistic not only thanks to masterful skills with virtual instruments, but first and foremost thanks to good writing and orchestration.

It's those skills, the dedication from a trained composer, that create great melodies and harmony. "Cheap" attracks people unwilling to invest. And I mean invest in more than only the financial way. I just don't see better VSTi's turning many of these enthousiasts turn into devoted students.

Which doesn't mean I think the future is necessarily all bleak. Trends change. Just look back in time and it's almost scary how fast (film) music trends evolve. There's undoubtedly a lot of shit being put out there today, regardless of instrumentation and style. From the optmistic point of view though, this creates opportunities for the few lucky and brave to stand out with something fresh. Although you'll never hear me say that's gonna be easy. But then that's the point, isn't it: "easy" is what the majority is doing already.


----------



## Ned Bouhalassa (Sep 11, 2012)

Jimbo 88 @ 10/9/2012 said:


> cycles...everything goes in cycles.
> 
> Saxer has a good point. Computers/machines helped speed up the music production process, but hurt melodic gestures. Machines are much better at rhythms than playing melodies,



Huh? Machines will do whatever you program them to do. If yours doesn't play melodies, it might have something to do with the programmer (garbage in, garbage out).


----------



## germancomponist (Sep 11, 2012)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> Jimbo 88 @ 10/9/2012 said:
> 
> 
> > cycles...everything goes in cycles.
> ...



+1


----------



## Daryl (Sep 11, 2012)

I think that a lot of the issues with the current trend are caused by the fact that Directors and Producers want to make decisions at the very last minute they can. If you write melodies and interesting harmonies, it will be a disaster when the film is re-cut, because editing interesting music is really difficult, when compared with a library of loops that all work at the same speed, in the same key, with minimal melodic interest.

Until the Production team learns to respect music and keep sane deadlines for Post Production, nothing will change.

D


----------



## jim2b (Sep 11, 2012)

Hi Ivan,

Very beautiful music.

Great work!

Jim


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Sep 11, 2012)

Ned Bouhalassa @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> Jimbo 88 @ 10/9/2012 said:
> 
> 
> > cycles...everything goes in cycles.
> ...



Yea, my machine plays melodies, I was speaking to the strengths and weaknesses of machines in general. Yes machines will do whatever you tell them within their capabilities. You should consider the "garbage in garbage out" principle....


----------



## KEnK (Sep 11, 2012)

Harmony is dead in film music because harmony is dead in pop music.

I'm a jazz musician.
One of the most amazing things about the so-called Great American Song Book,
is how many songs have chord progressions unique to themselves.

At this point unique chord progressions in pop are extinct.
It's not because the possibilities have been used up mathematically.

It's the dumbing-down of all things media oriented.
Expectations have been so reduced it's literally at the point where
genuine creativity has become suspect or strange.
The Generic is preferred over the Creative.

A huge part of this evolution is the tools available.
As has been said-
Buy a DAW, a few VI's, set a couple of loops in motion and you're a film composer.
I'm exaggerating only a little. 
The ubiquitous over use of loops is at fault here.

The minor spicatto arpeggio- the aeolian horn melody- the eighth note toms.
Stop it Please!

But really what can you expect from an Industry that seems to be
making mostly movies based on Comic Books, Video Games, TV re-runs 
or Remakes? 

It's a pitiful situation and every composer (especially the Big Guys) 
who resorts to the Generic is to blame for the continuing Dissolution of the Art.

(I feel much better now) :mrgreen: 

k


----------



## Gabriel Oliveira (Sep 11, 2012)

IvanP @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> Still, given the current film music hybrid "coolness", but me, being an advocate of Harmony and Cool symphonic vibe... I don't know if my music would sound outdated because of that...if anybody would like to comment, here's an example...would love to hear your comments in this matter  (sorry for highjacking)
> 
> https://vimeo.com/26369215
> 
> ...



very very GUD! 

which game is that?


----------



## José Herring (Sep 11, 2012)

I agree. Nice job IvanP.

I say don't give up people. There's still room for real music in cinema. It's all about the magic.


----------



## Niah (Sep 11, 2012)

JohnG @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> Am I wrong, or is it just the case that, for the time being at least, these techniques are seen as corny and old-fashioned? Like woodwinds.



I don't know but they certainly take me back to the past that's for sure. I am as nostalgic as it can be but I don't find those type of musical devices very contemporary sounding. They are very complex technically but at the same type very much black and white and too declarative in terms of the emotions expressed. They are a contrast to contemporary times which I find more complex, ambivalent, ambiguous, etc...Interesting enough I find that this complexity is better represented through more "simplistic" musical devices such as minimalism....this is just one example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFgAKevBTNc

Film music is nearly catching up and popular music has been injected with drone elements in various styles of music.

Sometimes I get the feeling from these discussions that there's a total lack of understanding of the job of a film composer and how adaptable one much be. No one gets a job working in a restaurant if his/hers ambition if life is to cook their favorite meal.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Sep 11, 2012)

We were flipping channels this morning (trying to escape the endless 9/11 replays) and saw Don Maclean being interviewed on one of the morning pap shows.

In between silly questions about "the five greatest songs of the 20th century," his song supposedly being one, he said that all those songs have melodies.

"The roll in rock 'n roll is gone," he said, meaning that everything is in-your-face guitars. He said you can move the volume control and nothing changes.

Now, maybe it was the drugs back in the day, but I always found "American Pie" sort of annoying.  However, the guy does have considerable stature, and he had an interesting way of putting it. Or maybe you had to be there to know what I found interesting? 

Anyway, of course melody is treated differently in scoring so it doesn't become distracting, but it and harmony are joined at the hip and that interview made me think of this thread. I have a feeling that it's really melody that's missing in all music, not just film music.

Rambling on down a related tangent, for a long time the old wive's A&R tale was that you just needed a piano/vocal or guitar/vocal demo to recognize a good song. Well, production has been a big part of music for the past 30 years, and I always thought that was silly.

But maybe that needs to become true again.


----------



## José Herring (Sep 11, 2012)

Imo, it will saturate itself out soon. I mean you have to apply some modicum of intelligence to music or it just degenerates into noise. Right now that noise is hip, but it won't be that way forever.


----------



## germancomponist (Sep 11, 2012)

josejherring @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> Imo, it will saturate itself out soon. I mean you have to apply some modicum of intelligence to music or it just degenerates into noise. Right now that noise is hip, but it won't be that way forever.



+1


----------



## handz (Sep 11, 2012)

Nice discussion wish I have the time to fully read it, unfortunately I believe it is more Melody that is dead, complex developing melody. It is sad what trend is set right now, I always wodner if it came to end like in 70s and melodic orchestral music soundtracks will become standard again.


----------



## SamGarnerStudios (Sep 11, 2012)

I wouldn't say dying as much as i would say that other things are becoming more attractive to the public. It seems to almost be tied in sync with our modern pop culture, music has gotten simpler and simpler. Its more about feeling now then experience and attentiveness, atleast the pop world. I have heard some very cool scores that revolved less on harmony then sounds, but i grow tired of it afterwhile. Thats why I'm kind of sick of Hans Zimmer right now. its a bunch of cool sounds, a big phat I-bVI progression, then some more sounds. 

The more that kids from this generation grow up and start becoming heads of projects, the more there going to want music that resembles their generation or what they like. I hve been asked to write things and been amazed at how musically retarded the person in charge was. It's also easier for non-musicians or educationally trained musicians to get into the industry.

That being said, theres always going tobe someone with their head on straight looking for good music, and thats where you can thrive.


----------



## FredrikJonasson (Sep 11, 2012)

josejherring @ Mon Sep 10 said:


> FredrikJonasson @ Mon Sep 10 said:
> 
> 
> > josejherring @ Mon Sep 10 said:
> ...



:|


----------



## Lex (Sep 11, 2012)

SamGarnerStudios @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> Thats why I'm kind of sick of Hans Zimmer right now. its a bunch of cool sounds, a big phat I-bVI progression, then some more sounds.



And this is why I'm sick of people attaching Zimmer to this sound. I still don't hear anyone else sounding like Zimmer. Dozens of younger composers do push that so called "hybrid" sound but they lack everything that Zimmer has. If anything the sound you are describing and that is present all over right now in most cases sounds like a lifeless, bland second rate copy of Jablonsky's work, not Zimmers.

alex


----------



## mark812 (Sep 11, 2012)

Lex @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> SamGarnerStudios @ Tue Sep 11 said:
> 
> 
> > Thats why I'm kind of sick of Hans Zimmer right now. its a bunch of cool sounds, a big phat I-bVI progression, then some more sounds.
> ...



I couldn't agree more.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Sep 11, 2012)

1. The moment you have two contiguous pitches harmony is implied.

2. The early hybrid scores were pioneered by Jerry Goldsmith who apparently knew _some_ harmony.

3. There has never been nor will ever be a Golden Age of Producers who knew their music. It's up to the composer to come with an approach and convince (aka _sell_) the producer on their approach.


----------



## re-peat (Sep 11, 2012)

I don’t see (or hear) the problem. 

And forgive me, but are some of the voices in this thread the very same ones who can always be found pretentiously deploring the loss of harmony and melody in today’s film music, and yet, invariably and instantly go down on their knees, mouth opened in a servile ‘O’-shape, everytime Hans Zimmer — not exactly a composer that is ever going to be remembered for the harmonic or melodic sophistication of his music, it seems to me (and I think he’ll agree) — decides to participate in some discussion?
Seriously, the hypocrisy and the snob-factor in this thread, as in all similar threads which preceded it, is pathetic in the extreme. And that is, in itself, much more worrying, I believe (considering this is a musicians’ forum) than whatever state film and/or tv music might be considered to be in.

And another question (even more rethorical than the previous one, I’m afraid): are we among open-minded, curiously creative and passioned musicians here? Or is this a get-together of embittered, narrow-minded burned-outs, who can’t keep up with the fascinating challenges presented by an artform that is vibrantly alive like it never was before? Blasé individuals who have to resort to that predictable and ultimately revolting blend of praising-the-craft-of-yesteryear and looking down with a sick sense of superiority on what’s happening today, in order to somehow make it acceptable for themselves that their creative flame has died out long ago? (If it ever really burned in the first place, that is. Which I highly doubt.)

Harmony isn’t dead. Nor is melody. Film music isn’t dead either. It’s not even slightly ill. It’s all in tip-top shape.
Film and tv music are going, as they always have, through some rather interesting transformations, that’s all. Like all living things do. If film music today, or any kind of music for that matter, would still sound like it did 20 years ago, now *that* would be a major cause for concern, because that would mean that there is indeed no life left in the artform whatsoever. 
Art (or any creative endeavour) which is alive, changes. And it’s creative, inspired people who trigger and embrace those changes. Simple as that. 

Sure, there’s a much bigger amount of bad music around than there is of good music, but I think you’ll find that this has always been the case. For as long as people have been making music, in fact. True talent, after all, is a rare commodity.

I believe there’s actually a pretty solid case to be made for the argument that both film and tv music are, today, in much better health than they ever were before. A lot more diverse, adventurous and timbrally creative, certainly.
I’ll even go one further: for one of the few times in its history, film music has again found a musical identity all of its own. (Previous occurrences happened during the early fifties and, later on, around the late sixties and early and mid-seventies). 
No longer the pseudo-classical identity it paraded with during the 50-or-so first years of its existence — and which gave film music, often quite justifiably, the “second rate music”-tag that it still is stuck with today —, no longer the Broadway-flavoured sugary coatings of half a century ago, no longer the silly pop derivations that have been poluting the genre on and off, but a unique, kaleidoscopic musical idiom that, in the hands of a creative musician, successfully blends musical ingredients sourced from the entire history of music, from every style or genre, and from all over the world. Ambient, avant-garde, traditional, electronic, minimalistic, virtuosic orchestral, rock, cheesy retro, romantic, leftfield, jazz, folk, techno, hybrid, ethnic, brutally atonal, gently neo-classical, experimental, shamelessly melodious, … the kitchens where film and tv music are prepared these days are much bigger and much better stocked (and with a lot more diverse ingredients) than ever before. What is there to complain, I wonder?
Film and tv music today, it seems to me, are possibly the richest, potentially most rewarding and most stimulating areas of musical creativity to be explored (or to dedicate oneself to).

Is some (or a lot) of it harmonically poorer than it used to be? Could be. Does it matter? I don’t think so. And I really don’t care either. Harmonic sophistication is not a parameter to rate music with anyway. (Nor is orchestral richness or melodic appeal.) If it were, Hans Zimmer (and I use his name as a sort of pars-pro-toto for a lot of contemporary film and tv music) would be a musical primitive, which he definitely isn’t.

Besides, harmonic vocabulary is (partly) a stylistic element and as such very much of its period. People today, turning to whatever artform, don’t necessarily express themselves best and most authentically/effectively by using the language that Cole Porter, Mark Twain, E.W. Korngold, Paul Cezanne, Franz Waxman, William Shakespeare, John Williams, Alexander Dumas, Chuck Berry, Ingmar Bergman, Peter Paul Rubens, Henry Mancini, T.S. Eliot, Duke Ellington, Frank Capra, Caravaggio, Bruce Broughton, Jerry Goldsmith or Bernard Hermann used, do they? Even if all those celebrated artistic languages were technically superior (when judged abstractly) to what appears to be the preferred (and best understood) artistic-linguistic choice of today.

And another thing: there is a certain kind of ‘harmony’ to be considered as well when doing so-called “sounddesign music”. It’s not your lofty academic set of harmonic principles, obviously, but it’s harmony-related nonetheless. Or, to be more precise, it’s that area in producing music, where harmonic frequencies matter just as much as harmonic notes do. And that’s not a superficiality. A topic that’s rarely been discussed here, but these abstract washes of sounds, machine-like patterns, clouds of clusters and atonal drones actually need to obey some harmonic logic of their own as well, for the combination of these elements to be musically successful.
What I’m getting at is this: creating sounddesign-y music (that can both sustain the dramaturgical curve it is required to sustain, and at the same time provide some musical interest, in whatever way) is just as much a craft as harmonizing a melody in an academically correct way. Before dismissing it as laughable, non-musical excrements of lazy-kids-with-computers who don’t know the first thing about ‘Proper Music’, just try and make it, and see how far you get.

People used to make the same accusation against pop(ular) music — and I see Kenk still does —, claiming a serious decline in quality from the 50’s and 60’s onwards. Complete nonsense, I say. (And very much *not* how a true jazz musician would observe the evolution, Kenk, if you permit me saying so.) 
The best popular music of the past five or six decades is just as interesting, profound, meaningful, relevant and very often musically as impressive (if not more so) as anything in that “Great American Songbook”, a collection which, let’s be honest, contains, next to its undeniable timeless jewels, a LOT of formulaïc, uninspired drivel as well. (If anything, I’m of the opinion that “The Great American Songbook” contains more true treasures in the way of lyrics than it does in the way of composition.) If one needs a list of examples (of great post-Songbook pop), I’ll happily provide one.

And it’s the same with film music. Like I said: it changes because it is alive. The day it stops changing, that’s the day it has died. Only musicians who are creatively dead themselves would prefer that situation.

_


----------



## José Herring (Sep 12, 2012)

Hans has actually had some incredibly good things to say about working in the industry and in dealing with film makers and in exploring your own voice. I've often valued the input.

And many of us have done lots of sound design music. Par for the course these days.

And before you go throwing the "snob" term around in a discussion that has up until this point been pretty honest and civil. Please try to recall the many times in the past two years that your attitude has absolutely shut down threads.

And, before you blast me for daring to speak up, please remember in the last few years the many times your responses has shut down all civil discussion. 

Tongue in cheek. But of course you won't see it that way.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Sep 12, 2012)

There are technical aspects about harmony for sure. And I totally agree with Piet on many points. But the main goal is to serve the needs of the film. 

The more vocabulary you have and the broader your listening experience, the deeper the well you have to draw from to create the solution the film needs. And sometimes it does take experimentation on the composer's part along with getting input from the producer and/or director.


----------



## lux (Sep 12, 2012)

The need of the film is often a relative concept. You dont know your movie needs something you havent thought of until you hear it running under your movie.

As a conseguence I feel that the lack of dynamicity a few scores have sometimes has more to do with the refuse of some directors to accept the interaction between the guy behind the camera and the guy with the piano as a full and complex experience. Which often leads to the usage of servile scores more than additive scores.

I smell all around more fear of the score than love for the score. Something I have the impression (not supported by any evidence) was less diffused among directors in the past.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 12, 2012)

Well, in a sharp rebuttal to the idea of harmony being dead, rystro posted a link to Johnny Greenwood's score for "The Master."

Worth a listen:

http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3648958


----------



## KEnK (Sep 12, 2012)

Peat-

That's a wonderful post.
Very detailed, full of appreciation for an ever advancing art form, etc.

You seem to have noticed only 1 or 2 lines of my post,
and of course are making suppositions about what I'm saying 
based on conversations you've had w/ other people.
Understandable and not a big deal, but I do feel a need to defend myself
against aspersions incorrectly cast. 

First I have to ask-
Do you get out much? :wink: 

Your post is talking about "potential", rather than the reality.
I challenge you to listen to any "pop station" of your choosing for one hour.
And tell me afterward that you're hearing a wide ever expanding enrichment of harmonic vocabulary. 
You are just not going to able to say that.

In spite of the fact that the sound of 2 pieces of metal being sawed or banged
will have "harmonic implications" I think that is a different discussion than one on "harmony" or a lack thereof. 

Seems like you didn't get past the phrase "Great American Song Book", and wrongly assume my preferences and expression are rooted in the past.

What I'm personally doing in Jazz is not playing Gershwin tunes.
I'm a nylon string guitarist combing Flamenco techniques in a kind of poly-metric funk context. 
I like chord structure, but actually prefer a more open approach to harmony, 
one that spontaneously evolves and expands in the moment. 
Lucky for me, I know a few players who can hang, and it's lots of fun.
Point being, I'm not backward looking as your note to me seems to imply.

My point was that not so long ago, many songs had unique chord structures. 
Now the idea of a chord progression is like a pre-set construction kit, leggos or some other pre-fab limited expression paint by numbers toy.

I'm personally not hearing this wide ever expanding universe of infinite forward moving creativity. 
I'm hearing about a dozen ideas, used again and again.
Confined by a formula for a formula.

I'm not talking here about the "Potential of Art Music", 
though that is where I hang my hat. 
I'm talking about the Film Music and Pop Music that _is out there now_. 
It is constrained, it is the formulaic regurgitation of box office success.

I'm not talking about the independent film that no one sees.
I'm talking about what most people see and hear, 
because that is ultimately what will define and shape an era.

90+% of what most people hear is Mainstream Big Business Fast Food Type Music.
Movies are by definition the same.

It is by nature Crap, Peat and you know it.

k


----------



## re-peat (Sep 12, 2012)

KEnK,

Well, if the subject has to be narrowed down to “music which most people hear” in “movies which most people see” or on “radiostations which most people tune into”, then yes, I’m willing to grant you your point, and everybody else’s his or hers. And not just willing: eager even, if only to make my escape out of this somewhat pointless conversation as quick as possible.

But before I’m off, a litte something on the subject of radio stations: maybe it's a continental-cultural difference? See, I’m not familiar with non-European radio at all, certainly not US radio — I have no idea how bad or how good it is —, but the stations I tune in to here (some of the Belgian ones and, occasionaly, a few from neighbouring countries), provide rather good programmes, I must say. I can listen to the radio all week here without ever loosing my optimistic/enthusiastic outlook on the state, course or future of music. 
Same thing with films and television, in fact. The things I get to see here in Belgium (in movie theatres and on television) make me conclude that there are still an awful lot of people out there, all over the world, doing amazing and wonderful stuff, both visually and musically.
Sure, there’s a disconcerting amount of inferior, bland nothingness being produced — same as it ever was, same as it ever was, … — but so far, those weeds still haven’t managed to outgrow the many, many beautiful flowers in the Garden Of Creativity, in my opinion. Mr. Dalliard, I've gone peculiar now.

All this to say: I really don’t share much of your cynicism or pessimism regarding the state of popular music, film music or movies. And I'll be _extremely_ unhappy if ever the day should come that I do.

_


----------



## KEnK (Sep 12, 2012)

re-peat @ Wed Sep 12 said:


> ...a litte something on the subject of radio stations: maybe it's a continental-cultural difference?


Yes indeed Peat-
A huge cultural difference.

I've spent some time in Central and Eastern Europe and do know 1st hand
there's a Love of Art there as a Necessary Ingredient of Life 
that is just not present in American Society.

We can digress into Politics for a moment and I'll tell you that the GOP
has been frothing at the bit for years to entirely cut the small pittance of funds called 
The National Endowment for the Arts.

It's a tiny fraction of the annual budget, but they want it to be Zero.
Our Education System is also heading this way.

Too many radio stations in this country are owned by a single company called Clear Channel. 

I could go on and on about how the US is moving towards being a 3rd World Country.
But I'll stop here, and just yes,
A Huge Cultural Difference.

k


----------



## gsilbers (Sep 12, 2012)

re-peat @ Tue Sep 11 said:


> I don’t see (or hear) the problem.
> 
> And forgive me, but are some of the voices in this thread the very same ones who can always be found pretentiously deploring the loss of harmony and melody in today’s film music, and yet, invariably and instantly go down on their knees, mouth opened in a servile ‘O’-shape, everytime Hans Zimmer — not exactly a composer that is ever going to be remembered for the harmonic or melodic sophistication of his music, it seems to me (and I think he’ll agree) — decides to participate in some discussion?
> Seriously, the hypocrisy and the snob-factor in this thread, as in all similar threads which preceded it, is pathetic in the extreme. And that is, in itself, much more worrying, I believe (considering this is a musicians’ forum) than whatever state film and/or tv music might be considered to be in.
> ...



finally... 

balancing out the thread.

man.. it was getting to be a beating the deadhorse thread. 


like if the "only good film music" is the one made with pen and paper, then recorded with orchestra and have "melody" and "complex harmony". 

i for one, got involved film music because of electronic type scores. to me john william wanna be like music sounds too cartoony for me. 
but i accept that others like it and respect their opinions. i just like pointing out that more "orchestral" scores with complex harmony and "melody" is a style and and not the norm and that very succesfull movies are scored this way as well as movies scored with electronic/sound design scores. many people like both and most dont realy care. 

i also like pointing out how vague of a topic it really is. becuase as my lasty post pointed out, there were about 7ooo movies released last year (theatres/VOD, directo to video/DVD etc) . not counting bollywood and some territories or tv shows. . so expecting to say that movies recently are this way is a very very hard thing to judge. what defines complex harmony? what really entails "melody"? is it more orchestral or electronic based? for each movie. 
amount of audience reached for each film so there could be a democratical approach to judging ? (i know, big corpo music for the masses and what not, but then how do we really jusdge besides "I think this music is good and this not based on my own upbringing and mood". " ) 
just saying "filmscore nowadays suck because they dont use melody and its all electronic" is a statement akind to a 5 year old trying to understand the world around him.

i buy all those electronic scores and would always buy any harry gregson william "electronic" score than a john william score any day.


----------



## KEnK (Sep 12, 2012)

gsilbers @ Wed Sep 12 said:


> just saying "filmscore nowadays suck because they dont use melody and its all electronic" is a statement akind to a 5 year old trying to understand the world around him.


I personally never thought this was an electronic vs acoustic thread.
I thought it was a discussion about the evolution or de-evolution of Harmonic Vocabulary.

I love electronic music and always have.
What I don't like is the continuous regurgitation of a limited vocabulary.

from my 1st post:
_The minor spicatto arpeggio- the aeolian horn melody- the eighth note toms.
Stop it Please!_ 

This would seems to imply (to me) that orchestral composition can be as guilty as any other.

It's the pre-fab pre-set fill in the blank try to sound like take your pick thing that I find objectionable.

Same Old Same Old can be done by an orchestra, a synth or any kind of grouping.

k


----------



## impressions (Sep 13, 2012)

i actually don't get it, pan's labyrinth, how to train your dragon, brothers grimm, the new startrek, it has everyone of the factors you've mentioned. maybe not in the degree of mozart or tchaikovsky, but these have very tight deadline compared to ordered concert work.
almost every orchestral film score by the top composers of hollywood, has harmony, scale changes and very good orchestration. 

or am i missing something?


----------



## rpaillot (Sep 13, 2012)

This topic isnt a fight between electronic music and orchestral music.
Both genre have their gems !!!

Yet, some people here are just tired of the current lazyness in most TV shows and a few hollywood movies. ( which fortunately to me are still top-notch quality for 90 % of the recent scores)

The last TV show score I've been impressed with was Dexter. Apart from it , almost every tv scores sound the same. Sorry but, give me omnisphere, hybrid tools and stylus RMX , and I can score you 3 episodes of CSI a week.

Now let's talk about trailer music...

It used to be very orchestral but slowly
progressed into hybrid orchestral with mostly only one pedal chord, 
strings ostinato in loop and those famous "inception" low brass blaring every 2 bars.
And for the most inspired track, some horns playing a melody reminiscent of "freedom figthers" from TSFH.
Oh and some dubstep loop over it.
That's lazyness.

Lately , I really liked Harry Gregson Williams ost for "total recall". And it's electronic. That's what I call inspiration


----------



## TheUnfinished (Sep 13, 2012)

re-peat @ Wed Sep 12 said:


> Mr. Dalliard, I've gone peculiar now.


For this comment alone I applaud you. But I happen to also agree with many of the points you made in your posts too.

There's a wide world outside Hollywood and US TV/radio, and you can find everything in it easily. If only you look.


----------



## JohnG (Sep 13, 2012)

Of course, there's a world outside Hollywood. But Hollywood's trends matter a lot for those of us who are not "concert" composers but who, nevertheless, like to get our hands on a large (or at least pretty large) orchestra when we can. 

In general, I am asked to demo most or all my cues before anyone is going to pay for players, which means the director and, usually, the producer as well must approve them. 

With the innumerable commercial pressures that producers face, one can hardly blame them for choosing a safe path. So, naturally, it's naive to expect that we can be left to our own devices and dream up whatever we like. 

The combination of merciless deadlines and temp scores can govern mercilessly what is "allowed" on a picture or show or trailer. As many here can attest, people get very attached to temp scores. And the short deadlines have an effect too; with little or no time to experiment or show alternate approaches, it can be simply impractical to break out of the mold.

So in other words, what "the mold" is at any given time can directly affect what we can get away with, so that mold is often important to us (or at least to me).

Not always -- there's Thomas Newman and Johnny Greenwood who experiment and strike a different path, and even some of the "big guys" branch out substantially at times. But, for many projects, there's a norm and the norm can be tough to breach.


----------



## KEnK (Sep 13, 2012)

TheUnfinished @ Thu Sep 13 said:


> re-peat @ Wed Sep 12 said:
> 
> 
> > Mr. Dalliard, I've gone peculiar now.
> ...


Not being familiar with this obscure reference I googled it.
Was led to a British comedy sketch.
Seems to be code for calling people stupid, 
or at best claiming they can't possibly understand.

If my research is faulty, please enlighten me.

k


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Sep 13, 2012)

As always with the craft of film scoring, if you can write complex harmonic music and choose not to because it does not fit the film or is not what the client wants, it is one thing. 

If you don't because you don't know how to, it is quite another.

And it has nothing to do with orchestral vs electronic.


----------



## re-peat (Sep 13, 2012)

KEnK @ Thu Sep 13 said:


> (...) Seems to be code for calling people stupid, or at best claiming they can't possibly understand.


K,

Your research is completely faulty, I'm afraid. The quote is indeed from a British sketch ("Models" by Fry & Laurie), but it's got nothing, and I repeat: nothing, whatsoever to do with calling people stupid or claiming they're unable to understand something. (Usually when I want to call someone stupid, I simply say so. Plain and direct. I would certainly never hide any such intentions behind some obscure quote.)

I only referred to Mr. Dalliard here to indicate feeling a bit awkward about the silly metaphor ("flowers in the garden of creativity") which I used in the preceding sentence.
Totally innocent, in other words. I'm sorry to have you worried and confused there for a moment.

_


----------



## KEnK (Sep 13, 2012)

Thanks Peat-

I think you're one of the more brilliant and "learned" posters here.
I preferred not to think you'd resort to such coded dismissals.

I did watch the sketch.
I'm sure you can understand my mistaken interpretation.

:wink: 
k


----------



## dcoscina (Sep 13, 2012)

All I know is that coming from a jazz background, my ears perk up when I hear some seriously vertical writing. That's why I started that thread on Lili Boulanger's music. Quite gorgeous. I don't hear the same kind of expansive harmonies in current film scores the way I did even 10 years ago when Elliot Goldenthal, Williams, Goldsmith, etc were actively writing (and in some cases, not dead).


----------



## Revson (Sep 14, 2012)

"Here we unveil a number of patterns and metrics characterizing the generic usage of primary musical facets such as pitch, timbre, and loudness in contemporary western popular music. Many of these patterns and metrics have been consistently stable for a period of more than fifty years. However, we prove important changes or trends related to the restriction of pitch transitions, the homogenization of the timbral palette, and the growing loudness levels."

http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120726/srep00521/full/srep00521.html


----------



## Niah (Sep 14, 2012)

JohnG @ Wed Sep 12 said:


> Well, in a sharp rebuttal to the idea of harmony being dead, rystro posted a link to Johnny Greenwood's score for "The Master."
> 
> Worth a listen:
> 
> http://www.vi-control.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=3648958



Not sure if that counts, isn't the movie set in the 50's or something? :mrgreen:


----------



## KEnK (Sep 14, 2012)

Revson @ Fri Sep 14 said:


> "Here we unveil a number of patterns and metrics characterizing the generic usage of primary musical facets such as...


I saw that study a couple of months ago.
Even spent some time trying to grasp the formulas they used to plot the various graphs.
Not being a statistician or mathematician, it was beyond my grasp.

It does seem to show though that statistically, 
things are more static now then in recent history. 

k


----------



## impressions (Sep 14, 2012)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZazEM8cgt0


----------



## Niah (Sep 15, 2012)

impressions @ Sat Sep 15 said:


> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZazEM8cgt0



The sheer irony that the word masturbation is bleeped ...


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Sep 15, 2012)

If people like Piet choose to maintain that an era where film music with harmonic richness, contrapuntal complexity, strong melodies, skilled orchestration is not intrinsically superior to an era to drones held against loops with pre-cooked combos of orchestral samples, they free to do so. I totally disagree and if that makes me one of the "embittered, narrow-minded burned-outs, who can’t keep up with the fascinating challenges presented by an artform that is vibrantly alive like it never was before", I can live with it.


----------



## Niah (Sep 15, 2012)

What I got from Re-peat's posts was, and this is not the first time I'm hearing this as other critics have said it too, that this era is incredibly diverse. With that in mind I'm curious how you see it simply as the era of "drones, loops and pre-cooked combos of orchestral samples".


----------



## KEnK (Sep 16, 2012)

Revson @ Fri Sep 14 said:


> "Here we unveil a number of patterns and metrics characterizing the generic usage of primary musical facets...
> 
> http://www.nature.com/srep/2012/120726/srep00521/full/srep00521.html


Hey!

The study above rated an article in the New York Times! 
www.nytimes.com/2012/09/16/opinion/sund ... ritic.html

This means it _must be_ true!
So it's mathematically proven that Jay is right and Peat is wrong. >8o :wink: :mrgreen: 

The debate is over- 
It's now a statistically proven fact that "Today's Music is Crap".

Case closed.
Next on the docket!?

...or are there _Math Deniers_ here??

k


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Sep 16, 2012)

KEnK @ Sun Sep 16 said:


> So it's mathematically proven that Jay is right and Peat is wrong. >8o :wink: :mrgreen:
> 
> quote]
> 
> Was there ever really any question about that? :twisted:


----------



## MichaelL (Sep 16, 2012)

KEnK @ Sun Sep 16 said:


> Revson @ Fri Sep 14 said:
> 
> 
> > "Here we unveil a number of patterns and metrics characterizing the generic usage of primary musical facets...
> ...




I beg to differ. Did you read the _entire_ article?

Here are the last few paragraphs:

"DID your parents tell you that today’s music is getting poorer and too loud? Well, maybe they were right. *But we will offer a different hypothesis: what if it is all about economy of resources? *If today’s music still satisfies listeners the same way pop music did 50 years before, then maybe its creators are simply better at crafting pleasing songs.

If music is a form of information and musicians are using fewer “words” to convey their message, maybe they’re getting more efficient.

*Far from being in decline, perhaps pop music is on the verge of a golden age.* Critics may disagree, and the qualitative debate may never be resolved. But the data, gleaned from massive music collections and computers, objective and detailed as they are, might just say otherwise. (emphasis added mine).

Sorry Jay.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Sep 16, 2012)

No I didn't read the article, I was joking.

I don't need math to tell me that the overall quality of music has declined. My ears, intellect, and training tell me that.


----------



## choc0thrax (Sep 16, 2012)

I used to worry that I was getting old but after talking to friends in the music industry and people younger than me the consensus is that yes, today's music is pretty much garbage. Out of desperation I find myself listening to a decent amount of pop and rap. It sure beats whatever rock has become.

And of course we've all watched the decline of film music. There used to always be some exciting score just around the corner. Today, I sit around biding my time until the next Zimmer, Powell, or Mansell release.


----------



## KEnK (Sep 16, 2012)

MichaelL @ Sun Sep 16 said:


> ...perhaps pop music is on the verge of a golden age.
> Critics may disagree, and the qualitative debate may never be resolved.
> But *the data, gleaned from massive music collections and computers, objective and detailed as they are, might just say otherwise.*


Sorry, but I think _you've_ missed the point, which I've emphasized here.

I did read the whole article and more importantly, the actual study itself.
Compared to what's in the actual study, those few lines about 
"Pop's Coming Golden Age" are illusory. 

It's odd that they chose to end this article in such an easy to misinterpret manner.
But if you take the time to look at the actual study, 
you'll see that they are definitely not coming to a conclusion about some up and coming Golden Age of Pop.

That is not at all the conclusion they've arrived at.

k


----------

