# John Williams Asteroid Feild, Parade of Ewoks, Here they come etc now in study score



## Steve Martin (Feb 17, 2014)

Just thought I would let people know that the following John Williams titles are now available in score.



Music from the Star Wars Saga (Deluxe Score). By John Williams. For Full Orchestra. John Williams Signature Edition Orchestra. 110 pages. Published by Hal Leonard (HL.4491067).

I. The Asteroid Field (4:50)

II. Parade of the Ewoks (4:10)

III. Cantina Band (2:15)

IV. Here They Come (2:15)

V. Luke and Leia (4:45)

VI. The Forest Battle (4:05)

(Total performance time - ca. 24 minutes).

Go to this link. It is probably sold on other sites as well, but this was one of the places I found it on.


http://www.sheetmusicplus.com/title/mus ... c/19935769

I thought some people may be interested in this.

I plan to be purchasing mine asap!

best,

Steve :D


----------



## jleckie (Feb 17, 2014)

Very VERY nice find there.

Thanks!


----------



## davidgary73 (Feb 17, 2014)

Awesome..thanks for the info. I'm planning to buy the Star Wars Suite first before getting this. 

Here's another good score @ http://www.sheetmusicplus.com/title/a-t ... c/19526621

Cheers


----------



## Steve Martin (Feb 17, 2014)

Yes,

I was just about over the moon when I found this one. I've been dying to have this score. I LOVED the asteroid field when I heard it on DVD. Makes your hairs stand on end.

Always wanted to see how John Williams did this. The orchestration sounds superb - just magic.

John Williams genius at work here. What else can I say but genius!!


Steve :D


----------



## jamwerks (Feb 17, 2014)

Awesome !!


----------



## mverta (Feb 17, 2014)

As always, guys, I cannot recommend highly enough that you transcribe these pieces to the very limit of your ability before learning what they really are. You'll only have one chance!

_Mike


----------



## Scrianinoff (Feb 17, 2014)

mverta @ Mon 17 Feb said:


> I cannot recommend highly enough that you transcribe these pieces to the very limit of your ability* before learning what they really are*.


What do you mean with "before learning what they really are"?


----------



## davidgary73 (Feb 17, 2014)

Scrianinoff @ Mon Feb 17 said:


> mverta @ Mon 17 Feb said:
> 
> 
> > I cannot recommend highly enough that you transcribe these pieces to the very limit of your ability* before learning what they really are*.
> ...



Means transcribing the notes on your scorepad by listening to the music track before you look into what the notes are in the original score.


----------



## BoulderBrow (Feb 17, 2014)

Scrianinoff @ Mon Feb 17 said:


> mverta @ Mon 17 Feb said:
> 
> 
> > I cannot recommend highly enough that you transcribe these pieces to the very limit of your ability* before learning what they really are*.
> ...



Listen to the track and transcribe what you *think* you hear before comparing your transcription to the actual score. Can't wait to do this when I get a spare few mins/hours


----------



## BoulderBrow (Feb 17, 2014)

o-[][]-o David!


----------



## Scrianinoff (Feb 17, 2014)

Ah, of course, thanks, I was thinking Mike was referring to some implied qualitative statement about these pieces.


----------



## mverta (Feb 17, 2014)

My statement is they're badass. And you will learn more by trying to transcribe them - even one bar at a time ahead of checking the score - than you can possibly imagine.

_Mike


----------



## Scrianinoff (Feb 17, 2014)

Well, they're indeed 'more powerful than you can possibly imagine', Obi-Mikenobi 

I know, since I've experienced it myself with the scores of Harry Potter, Schindler's List and the already previously available Star Wars scores. For each of those I thought: ''The force is strong in this one'. So I heartily recommend those scores. If anybody is still hesitant getting these scores, then 'I find your lack of faith disturbing'.


----------



## AlexandreSafi (Feb 17, 2014)

mverta @ Mon Feb 17 said:


> As always, guys, I cannot recommend highly enough that you transcribe these pieces to the very limit of your ability before learning what they really are. You'll only have one chance!
> 
> _Mike



Mike is absolutely right! 

And I've made this mistake myself, I mean, think about how it usually works! You get the great wizard's book in your hands, but now you really "think" you got it all figured out, that you're in this very moment within the Master Mind and probably makes you less paying attention to the DETAILS than you think...

We should all start by encouraging to see ourselves trying and failing to hear it all so we can really realize from the bottom up what makes the music beautiful or genius or whatever, and maybe then see with more focus those elements that we didn't grasp first clearly repeated in other of JW's crafty works...


And so I say Mike is absolutely right, because he probably knows too that "ear training and transcription" are probably the two greatest underrated skills in whatever branch of music making...

Or... maybe people are subconsciously more afraid of those two skills than they would consciously think they are, because they are a true test of the human soul...

Alex


----------



## AndreP (Feb 17, 2014)

Scrianinoff @ Mon Feb 17 said:


> mverta @ Mon 17 Feb said:
> 
> 
> > I cannot recommend highly enough that you transcribe these pieces to the very limit of your ability* before learning what they really are*.



This times a hundred. As @AlexandreSafi also stated, we tend to look to score as a handicap sometimes and forget to sharpen our own skills and then compare and improve ours. 

I'm reminded of when years ago (maybe it was on this forum), a poster had downloaded a few Marco Beltrami cues and was looking thru the orchestration on an action and was wondering why the oboe (maybe it was clarinet) was even playing because you couldn't hear it in the track. Therein is the study of orchestration. The blending of colors and instrument groupings to bring out melodic lines. Looking at the score and then really, really listening to the track one would hear how the woodwind helps bring out that melodic line. Though, if some of us were to try and mock up a cue from scratch, our orchestration would be possibly vastly different, but we'd see what we were missing from the real thing.
....I really don't know where I'm going with this :lol: /\~O


----------



## aaronnt1 (Feb 17, 2014)

AndreP @ Mon 17 Feb said:


> I'm reminded of when years ago (maybe it was on this forum), a poster had downloaded a few Marco Beltrami cues and was looking thru the orchestration on an action and was wondering why the oboe (maybe it was clarinet) was even playing because you couldn't hear it in the track. ...



:lol: That's hilarious.

Unfortunately, the art of orchestral orchestration is in decline I feel. It seems that electronic ambiences and sound design, as much as I love those aspects of music making are winning the war when competing for the modern composer's attention. 
Not saying that's wrong necessarily, just a big shame.


----------



## mverta (Feb 17, 2014)

I've been getting a lot of young composers ordering my orchestration masterclasses, actually. The idea is that orchestration is about balance and blend between complimentary or contrasting colors, no matter what your instrument source is. Even more synth-y palettes use patches that could be considered to be brass-like, or woodwind-like in the roles they play. But one comment I get a lot is that the traditional orchestra is capable of a lot more sound-design-y and interesting colors than people often realize until they jump in the deep end!

_Mike


----------



## aaronnt1 (Feb 17, 2014)

mverta @ Mon 17 Feb said:


> But one comment I get a lot is that the traditional orchestra is capable of a lot more sound-design-y and interesting colors than people often realize until they jump in the deep end!
> _Mike



Totally. There's no doubt we are lucky to be living in a time when electronic sound design is providing an abundance of colour available to the composer and it's so liberating using them but I still love hearing the orchestra and the colours in a JW or Stravinsky score. I could easily spend a night in listening to my favourite orchestral scores but I've never felt that way about the more electronic scores in my collection, don't know why.


----------



## mverta (Feb 17, 2014)

Structure. 

Today's scores are largely collections of really cool sounding, perfectly scene-appropriate moments strung together, but which do not together form a cohesive dramatic story arc. What's missing is long-form symphonic structure/training, which is not surprising, because you don't just "do" that. You study that, and for a long time. 

Writing a tweet is easier than writing a novel. But even if you write 1000 amazing tweets and make a book collection out of them, you won't return to it like you do a great novel because the underlying, compelling story and structure isn't there. That's the difference between scores today and scores from 40-50 years ago. It's not the sound. Sure, the sound has changed somewhat, but today's scores use brass and strings and percussion; and they have melodies, and thematic underpinnings, too. But they don't develop them, uniquely, musically, harmonically and contrapuntally over 90+ minutes. It's what makes a Goldsmith score a "suite," damn near a symphony, and why you can just put it on, and listen to it end to end and hear the whole story unfolding in a unique and connected way.

Structure.

When each moment of a modern score is cool; when each moment "works,"; when each moment is interesting in and of itself, it's hard to identify anything about it as "wrong," or lacking - sort of like a menu of nachos, and candy, and french fries and pizza and ice cream would all taste amazing, but not together make a nutritious meal. Many modern scores are just that - tasty, but nutritionless, leaving the deepest part of the listener's soul unsatisfied and malnourished. Why do you think everything has to be so "epic" all the time? Bigger and bang-ier and louder and choir-ier... it's a desperate cry to maintain interest when there really isn't anything interesting being said at the core. Music is a language, and a storytelling medium, and I'm afraid there is no shortcut to telling good long form stories. Not everyone is a Shakespeare or Stephen King, and hardly anybody's trying to be anymore. Just a couple good viral memes will do. Meanwhile, the truly compelling, long-form music endures - hundreds of years and still being played. Let's see where today's average blockbuster score is in 40 years. If it's still being played to sold-out concerts like Williams' stuff is, then I guess we'll know if it was truly worth remembering.


_Mike


----------



## sluggo (Feb 17, 2014)

Firstly, I little shout out to Herbert Spencer, JW's orchestrator. Even though most of the core info is in the sketches, HS took those sketches and put them to score.

If you're craving more, check out some symphonic works by British composer William Alwyn.


----------



## mverta (Feb 17, 2014)

Herb Spencer was. the. man. No question about it.

But let's clarify: _Most_ of the "core info" isn't in JW's sketches. All of it is. Not part of it, not some of it, not most of it. All of it. HS added no melodies, no countermelodies, no chords, no structural changes. JW is even usually specific in his colorings, beyond just "woodwinds," which is usually the minimum notation he'll put in a sketch.

So the question becomes why is it so clear when the HS era ended? Why are the post-HS sounds so clearly different, given the same, specific input by the same composer. The answer is that there are a ton of ways to voice a woodwind chord, and Herb spoke an idiom from the Golden Era that's different than a modern master like Conrad Pope. Some people prefer the HS orchestrations, while some find the super-lean, clear colors of today more pleasing. That's just personal preference. But neither Herb nor Conrad would ever define themselves as serving as JW's "orchestrator" in the traditional sense. JW is far too specific, and as I illustrated in my Here's Johnny masterclass last week, it was his orchestrational chops that came together before his melodic sense did. You can hear the Johnny colors which later rippled into his film scores even in his television days, even before his melodic muscles were developed.

_Mike


----------



## dannthr (Feb 17, 2014)

Also, JW played a mean piano on Peter Gunn.


----------



## dgburns (Feb 17, 2014)

mverta @ Mon Feb 17 said:


> Structure.
> 
> Today's scores are largely collections of really cool sounding, perfectly scene-appropriate moments strung together, but which do not together form a cohesive dramatic story arc. What's missing is long-form symphonic structure/training, which is not surprising, because you don't just "do" that. You study that, and for a long time.
> 
> ...



If the history of the world was one big symphony,our time is simply the "intermission" 8) 

....but seriously,i love reading your posts M,but i sometimes find you speak with a strong gaze into your rearview mirror.one thing we all know is film music has never repeated itself,and I doubt any of the golden period will ever re-surface.What i do know with conviction,is that what has yet to come will be different from anything that came before...
i know the ones to come will not disappoint in creating something unexpected.Question is,are you looking forward,or are you looking back?I want to be part of what has yet to come.even if it sucks balls!


----------



## aaronnt1 (Feb 18, 2014)

mverta @ Mon 17 Feb said:


> Structure.
> 
> Today's scores are largely collections of really cool sounding, perfectly scene-appropriate moments strung together, but which do not together form a cohesive dramatic story arc. What's missing is long-form symphonic structure/training, which is not surprising, because you don't just "do" that. You study that, and for a long time.
> 
> ...


I agree with much of what you have said here and that structure and narrative play a part, though for me, I think it’s a lot more fundamental than that. I mean a lot of my favourite scores or orchestral works I couldn’t really care about the narrative it accompanies, ballets can be just as daft as the films for which some of my favourite scores are for. I think for me it probably comes down to a simpler music vs sound. It’s a massive generalisation I know but I would hazard a pretty confident guess that the typical budding film composer of today spends a vast amount of time learning synthesis, mastering / engineering, how to program and use samples (and overcoming daily software gremlins!) that their actual musical vocabulary is not as developed as maybe it would be if they concentrated on learning actual music, counterpoint, melody etc.... So many times I hear modern tracks by young composers which are abound with cool sounds, loops and colours but ultimately can be reduced to very simple underlying harmonic structures and clichéd chord progressions, very often simple triads.

Again, I’m not saying this is wrong but I do think it’s a shame. Take something like the Bourne series scores – no doubt Powell is an amazingly gifted composer, insanely so, just listen to the bonkers Robots! (ok so he had quite a lot of help by the looks of things, but still... wrong thread!) – they are effective scores with lots of cool sounds and modern elements but for me it’s throwaway music. It’s not something I really enjoy to listen to and ‘take in’. 

I’m not trying to make a snobbish point, not my intention, I’m not going to say I only like serious music, I do love a good symphony or concerto but I also like enjoyable thrill ride orchestral scores like Powell’s own X-Men 3. The question is why I would prefer listening multiple times to a score like ROTJ or Reign of Fire or ET but not something like the Bourne series? I think because there isn’t much ‘music’ in the Bourne series, mostly cool effects and ambiences. I’ve sort of talked myself into a bit of a corner because Reign of Fire is a mostly atonal score, which I guess can be seen as modern sound design so I guess I’m more confused than I thought! Still, I think my point remains, big orchestral works tend to me more music orientated than the more harmonically simpler, atmosphere and ambience reliant electronic sound designy type scores, as much as I do enjoy those aspects.

I wouldn’t dismiss either the human element, i.e. the expressiveness of human playing you get in orchestral works.


----------



## toomanynotes (Mar 4, 2014)

Great stuff, wonder if its the same format as the ones floating around on the net for many a year that collectors hold on to between their dirty buttcheeks...

+1 to Mike Verta, you only get one shot to have an educated guess on the orchestration, Harmony ,instrumentation..colors.. on a piece of music before laying your eyes on the sheet music.. otherwise, 
"what has been seen..cannot be undone" therefore you've cheated yourself of a golden opportunity to better yourself.. quote Mike. ; ) hiccup... i've had a few gins n tonics..


----------

