The Marvel Symphonic Universe.

I'm also curious as to how one applies this practically to game scores, some of which follow a more distinct story (and as such are easier to score in a manner more similar to film), i.e. Austin Wintory's Journey score, but also scores that are more a collection of pieces that apply to certain environments or situations and follow less of a linear score structure. Certainly the basics of development applies here, but you seem to express a strong distaste for scores that don't fit the "true" long form category.

In any case, do you cover the application of this concept to other styles in more depth in any of your other masterclasses? I.e. will I find more by digging into Comp 2 or Horror, or should I go for Structure? I'll likely be obsessively thinking about this until I get a better mental grasp of it. Now's the time to plug a class, I'm sitting here waving cash at my screen ;-).

 

I absolutely believe sound-design/minimal scores have equal rights to be in film as any JW orchestral score. It does not make the composer any lazier or less talented in my eyes, they just prioritise a different aspect - timbres and colours evoke different emotions, if it was not true, we would not need to have a multitude of instruments in orchestra. I also do not believe a score HAS to work on its own, if it works perfectly within the body of work it exists in.

Traditional composers spend hours upon hours creating the perfect composition that tells the story , others choose to spend the same time on creating the perfect soundscape that puts the listener into the atmosphere and the space of the world of the movie. I do not see either approach as more or less valid or respectable than the other. different approaches suit different ends.

Take The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo for example - the score is mostly devoid of melody and traditional structure, yet it works and it says things no orchestral composition could tell, it doesnt aim to tell you the story of the film - it pulls you into the world so you can experience the story of the film by immersing you in its world. And its not some niche thing either, the score was very well received.
an i
And it is not like Reznor is like "damn I cannot write a melody I will just make some beeps and boops on my modular and call it a day lol" because A) The music obviously had an immense amount of consideration and thought put into it which is evident from the music itself and from the way he talks about his process and B} As the songwriter, vocalist and main instrumentalist of one of the most popular bands which has been around for almost 30 years - he can write a damn good melody structure his music.

Of course, this applies to any talented "ambient" oriented composers out there, take Johannson with Arrival and Sicario - its not hack writing or whatever, its just a different area of musical expression. We have all these sonic possibilities opening up to us as technology advances, why not explore them in ways that have not been done before?

End or rant.

 

Well said! I completely concur.

I do, however, get why composers and musicians get frustrated with the lack of more "sophisticated" (if that's an appropriate term), or melodically and structurally complex scores in film. Williams is really quite unique in his writing, as were many of the composers that influenced him and the multitudes of other composers out there -- his scores are dense, often rather complex but very accessible, and genuinely quite memorable. He's really a genius when it comes to melodic writing and development. It's especially frustrating seeing the amount of franchise films and drawn out character/adventure films that come out (Marvel being the obvious here considering it being such a high grossing franchise) that lack long-form, standalone scores. Shore's LOTR is obviously a favourite of mine, as I've mentioned.
As Mike mentioned in Comp 1, I can also understand why many session musicians are frustrated with a lack of challenging sessions, or when so many Hollywood scores sound the same. That would be immensely boring, especially when all you get to play as a session musician is Zimmitation trailer music. I also understand why the scores and some of the composers aren't well received, especially if they tend towards the repetitive and unmemorable.

I certainly don't think all or even most scores need the adventurous Williams-long-form style, and I think it would be a detriment to some of my favourite films had they had a strictly "music-the-length-of-the-film" type of approach. There's a lot to explore creatively, style-wise, as you mention, and my consideration when writing a piece of music sure as hell wouldn't be "I wonder if I'll be popular with the session musicians for this" -- that type of thinking can quickly lead to the kind of inaccessible-instrument-wanking that no one relates to emotionally. And sure, certain alternatively styles of scoring/music may not fit the traditional definition of "score", but I very much think some experimental/atmospheric/ambient/minimalist scores (structure wise) fit a film much better than sticking to a strictly long form, "complete" score. Like it or not, the structure, at least, of the Revenant score was incredibly appropriate for the film. This video comes to mind:

What I have been realizing the last few days, though, is that I do agree with Mike: from a listener's point of view at least (since my composition experience isn't even worth mentioning alongside his own), "classical" (not referring specifically to the time period) composers and film composers like Williams and Hermann are well worth studying, regardless of one's stylistic choices. I don't want to sound like them, necessarily, but every example I've listened to the last few days of my favourite score work, and much of my favourite music in general, do develop and change whilst providing anchors (even if the music is complex and dense) and avoiding boring repetition. Some pieces I like do develop more vertically than horizontally, but in the context of the whole, this isn't the norm, and it serves to build atmosphere in the context of the full work which does contain a good deal of development. I can completely see why having a good grasp of long form is immensely useful and leads to better music in general, even if the context is a single song, and I've noticed that even in my own more abstract "ambient" pieces an understanding of coherent but interesting development is invaluable; I really can't think of a place where having a strong understanding of development and evolving cohesion would be detrimental. It's also obvious that long form, even if changed stylistically, is drastically lacking in modern film as well.
What I'm hoping to learn more on in following masterclasses is how to apply these concepts in more subtle ways in different styles, i.e. in horror or less tonal forms, in minimalist or atmospheric form, etc.

 

Very much so, I agree with everything you said, it is truly invaluable to learn structure,development, composition from the masters, be it Williams, Copeland, Mahler, but it to have your mind set on that being the only acceptable form of music really narrows your horizons quite a bit. And the same applies on the other side of the coin, if you only limit yourself to recent work, you are doing yourself a disservice.

There is a definite lack of long form soundtracks now, but hey, it used to be the norm back in the days, now it is not, but that does not mean it is gone forever - because it is not. As people become used to it and composers start to exhaust their possibilites they will start looking for new things - and that is often done by repurposing old things. Audiences will start longing for memorable themes on a wider scale and the films will have to provide them with just that otherwise they will not make money.

Just look how the 80s are really hip again - as you swing the pendulum in one direction, you are setting it up to eventually swing back.

 

I would like to think this is true, but I'm perhaps a bit more pessimistic. Sure, the '80s may be hip again, but I doubt (I do hope) that the '70s, with all its focus on "real" sounding production, experimental progressive rock, etc, will return in any sort of mainstream fashion the way '80s music and production has. I do think the public at large is capable of having good taste, but the mainstream is pretty darn lazy, and if they're constantly fed production-line pop by exec's who want to play it safe it's what they'll continue eating.

 

True, but even my 15 year old brother who has heard pretty much nothing but mainstream pop from the latest decade will automatically finish any Williams theme if I hum the first few notes, enjoying pieces like that is pretty much an innate thing for human beings so I doubt that it would ever go away - even in the middle of nowhere where I am located, clubs with live complex jazz performances still have no attendance issues - people will always appreciate great music, and the scarcer it becomes, the more they will seek it out.

 

I mean, hell, generations in the future will probably look back on our music and shake their heads in disbelief of how simple it was in comparison to whatever microtonal insanity they would be composing. Maybe not, but I am more on the optimistic side of things in terms of the future.

 

Good point, I sincerely hope that's the case. I myself hear plenty of classical as a toddler and at young ages, after which I sought the "brain candy" crap that was a lot of radio pop (don't get me wrong, there's great pop in existence, but a large majority of churned-out radio pop is formulaic, forgettable trash). I did eventually find Queen, AC/DC, Soundgarden, Rage Against The Machine, Audioslave, etc, which further led to Deep Purple, Dio, Zeppelin, film scores, and eventually King Crimson and the like, along with more virtuoso-oriented bands. If there was hope for me, there must be for others. I suppose a modern glimmer of that hope was the LOTR score -- I'm not sure anything like it had been created in quite a while, and never to that scope. It was certainly well loved.

I'm definitely filling my kids' heads with Rachmaninoff, Debussy, Chopin, and a host of other composers and bands before they start discovering their own stuff, so at least it's "in there" already.

 

Dear Alan, Johannson is just as much a soundscape composer as Ligeti is just because he wrote Atmospheres. Nobody here is speaking against soundscapes in general. They are of course right, where it fits the movie.
I cannot speak for everyone here, but I happen to notice that besides soundscapes and percussion beds there seems to be almost nothing that filmmakers seem to feel to fit their movies. And even those soundscapes are often far from as interesting and diverse as in the case of arrival. That is what I don't like, as much as I don't like it when a composer is not able to deliver anything else.

 

True, did not mean to paint him as a one trick pony composer.

Maybe not specifically right here and right now, but plenty of people discount them in composer communities.

True, but my sentiment was about composers who do their thing well, no matter what it is.

Why would it bother you that a composer only does one thing? The directors choose the composers and no music goes in without their approval. If the director likes the work of a composer, he does a good job on the soundtrack and it works well with the movie - I could not care less whether or not he can do anything else than that.

 

Very nice, if what Rick Beato says is true, they might develop perfect pitch that way.

 

Excellent point -- I'd be the first to say (as a huge fan of atmospheric scores/music in general) that there's a ton that's boring and generic. I also think the lack of long form scores in films exaggerates this as well. There are some fantastic scores being written, in my opinion, but most aren't in the mainstream, and films in the mainstream that could easily fit a traditional, Williams-esque long-form score completely ignore this possibility in favour of generic, unmemorable scene-sounds (hence the existence of this thread and its original topic).
I again can't help but agree with Mike that soundscapes and minimalist scores, or even percussion beds, would be served so much better with attention to anchors and development. The more I think about this and listen to my favourite music, the more I find it to be the case.
However, re: a composer not able to deliver anything else. I can't help but think of actors in this regard -- some actors always play similar characters, and while this becomes predictable in a way, they still execute those performances fantastically (i.e. Tom Cruise -- like him or not, Collateral, The Last Samurai, etc were similar but fantastically executed roles). Other actors (i.e. Andy Serkis) play astoundingly diverse roles and do them all well. I probably have more admiration for the latter, but in the end, if a performance is good and different enough to be distinctive, then I'm happy. Same re: compositions. Elfman is pretty darn recognizable, as is Zimmer, as is Williams -- they sound like themselves.

I'm experimenting on my daughter at the moment following his guidelines to see if she can develop perfect pitch. Curious to know how much the component is genetic, but Rick seems to have done it with all three of his kids.

PS -- @Mike Verta : Thanks for emphasizing this frequently early on, you've really turned my focus in this regard and it's been a fairly epiphanal realization. Your philosophy of remaining dedicated to quality has been hugely inspiring.