Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Forum Jump  
James Newton Howard's Sixth Sense
Last post Wed, Nov 21 2007 by William, 49 replies.
Options
Go to last post
3 Pages123>
Posted on Sat, Oct 07 2006 13:41
by Dom
Joined on Sat, Nov 13 2004, London, Posts 224
It's brilliant orchestral score and it has a great, modern sound. I wish there was a printed score available - I am trying to work out how it's done but my ears are not good enough.

I think he worked a lot with 4 note clusters (spaced in semitones) on this score, but there are unusal percussion/woodwind/brass combinations (for example around 1:00 on "Suicide Ghost") that i can't work out at all...

I uploaded Suicide Ghost here: http://dominikscherrer.com/05SuicideGhost.mp3

Can anybody work out what's going on?

best,

Dom
Posted on Mon, Oct 09 2006 20:26
by mathis
Joined on Sat, Feb 07 2004, Munich, Germany, Posts 1137
I'd recommend studying some "New Music" (with capital N). Boulez, Penderecki, Nono, you name it. These shrill WW/Brass sounds are THE New Music clichée and you find them in probably every New Music score in your local library...
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 01:35
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5726
Study Pierre Boulez?

Only an idiot would do that.

O.K. - that is my PG version of this post. I will be releasing the Unrated edition on DVD later this year.
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 05:41
by Dietz
Joined on Tue, Aug 06 2002, Vienna / Europe, Posts 8173
Confused

Dear William - pleeeaaase ...
/Dietz - Vienna Symphonic Library
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 09:32
by mathis
Joined on Sat, Feb 07 2004, Munich, Germany, Posts 1137
Only an idiot would NOT study everything existent on earth.

Apart from that I don't see the point of your post. He wants to know how New Music effects are done and for that he has to study New Music. Your opinion on Boulez is of total irrelevance here

Besides that, Boulez really knows his craft. I saw him conducting his own music and it rocks. What he might have said once earlier in his life in a time when everybody and his dog said really stupid things I don't care for.
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 18:12
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5726
Mathis, if you heard the things Boulez said, with incredible arrogance, about nearly every great composer of the past, you would not study him. He said Beethoven AND Mozart were worthless. He laughed at Tchaikovsky (of course - a Romantic - what a joke to a sophisticate like Boulez!) and placed himself higher than J. S. Bach. I do not appreciate arrogance of that kind. Do you? Maybe you do...

To me only a fool would say those things, especially if he is a musician. And it is foolish to study a fool, unless you are a psychologist looking for insight into how the human mind degenerates, you will learn nothing from someone like that except as a study in the lowliness of human behavior.

Thanks for judging the relevance of what I wrote. I thought this was the internet and a free Forum where one can say whatever the conversation inspires one to say. So I am to stick directly to the facts? Maybe I don't feel like it. Maybe I feel like digressing. So what?

On the subject of the post, I notice that you did not answer the question. You simply dismissed it. An excellent way to seem to be making an intelligent response without doing so. I thought the James Newton Howard score was effective for this film. It wasn't mere compendium of New Music cliches (whatever that is - when is it no longer "New" I wonder?). In fact, to me it did not sound particularly "New." It sounded like typical current filmmusic, i.e., parallel minor chords, chromatic shifts between major and minor, etc., though with some interesting subtlety. The use of a shifting tonality from a minor tonic to a major one a half-step below was an evocative sound. However I don't presume as some people do to know everything that is "going on" with it (mainly because I never studied it). But I also don't dismiss it as nothing but cliches to place myself above it.
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 18:20
by Angelo Clematide
Joined on Thu, Sep 08 2005, Posts 1139
William wrote:
I thought this was the internet and a free Forum where one can say whatever the conversation inspires one to say. So what?


So thought possibly Boulez too.....

Boulez-vous coucher avec moi (ce soir)?
Creole Lady Marmalade!
Guiche Cuiche ya ya da da, Guiche Guiche ya ya here.
Mocha chocalata ya ya, Creole Lady Marmalade.
Boulez vous coucher avec moi, ce soir.
Boulez vous coucher avec moi.

.
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 19:26
by PaulR
Joined on Mon, Dec 22 2003, England, Posts 2371
Dom wrote:

Can anybody work out what's going on? Dom


No. I doubt if you asked Newton Howard he would be able to tell you now. It is obviously orchestral manoevres. You can hear the same type of thing in The Shining. You would basically just work through something like this yourself. It would be difficult not to be original.
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 21:24
by Angelo Clematide
Joined on Thu, Sep 08 2005, Posts 1139
Dom wrote:
Can anybody work out what's going on?


Here a similar score from Matthew Wallace:

http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/cgi-bin/show_score.pl?scoreid=2810

mp3:
http://www.sibeliusmusic.com/mp3/2/8/1/2810.mp3

Just add a gong drum hit with a leather mallet and a metal goldsmith poltergeist cherry synth and a synth choir and tons of reverb. plus use some transforming for reducing the the chord width

Smile

.
Posted on Tue, Oct 10 2006 22:37
by mathis
Joined on Sat, Feb 07 2004, Munich, Germany, Posts 1137
Bill, Dom asked specifically for the shrill woodwind/brass effect at around 1 minute. Of course the other stuff hasn't anything to do with New Music...
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 00:15
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5726
By way of explanation for my previous ranting (and edited) post, first of all - alcohol, and secondly, quotes like this -

"It is not enough to deface the Mona Lisa because that does not kill the Mona Lisa. All art of the past must be destroyed." -- Pierre Boulez, 1971, quoted in the Sunday New York Times

This is garbage, not only because Leonardo da Vinci was a mind that dwarfs Boulez, because also because it is like what has actually been done by totalitarian regimes - for example the Taliban. I don't like the belligerant, arrogant mentality shown by Boulez, who has no respect for "the Past." It is perfectly possible the do new work, revolutionary work, without shitting all over people of the past. That is a sign of a small mind. And people who respect great art of the past are not stuck in it, as he implies. They learn from it.

And Mathis, please understand, I don't really care that much. Believe whatever you want to believe, worship whomever you want to worship. It's all mainly a source of amusement to me.
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 02:41
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5726
Angelo,

Yeah, and so I'm responding to him. So what's your point? You have no point. Just attempting to contradict me in general, huh?

What neither you nor Mathis respond to is what I was disturbed by - Boulez trashing all of previous composers and music history in favor of....

himself.

That is my problem. That someone that arrogant and childish, would be put up as something to "study." As Mathis suggests. But since you contradict me, I must assume you approve of all that trashing he did, as Mathis does. So, you believe he - Mr. Boulez - is superior to not only Beethoven, but Mozart, Tchaikovsky AND J.S. Bach.

O.K. Whatever... Confused
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 10:53
by mathis
Joined on Sat, Feb 07 2004, Munich, Germany, Posts 1137
I earlier wrote this:

mathis wrote:
What he might have said once earlier in his life in a time when everybody and his dog said really stupid things I don't care for.


Come on, in the 60's and 70's really everybody was claiming shit like that. Not only Boulez. It was "en vogue" to speak like that. Don't take it so personal. Of course it's idiotic. Nobody denies that.

I mean, Boulez himself really does completely different things now that he did 35(!) years ago. He composes totally different. Do you want to be judged for the rest of your lifetime for some stupidity you have claimed 35 years ago?
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 13:59
by Angelo Clematide
Joined on Thu, Sep 08 2005, Posts 1139
William wrote:
Angelo,
So what's your point? You have no point.


Well, first Boulez is Boulez! Second, the quote from him is not much more then a statement from a euphoric young man, not unlike what you say from time to time under influence, but Pierre was possibly sober from alcohol. Third, I'm always interested when other musicians discover new worlds of sound.

William wrote:
But since you contradict me, I must assume you approve of all that trashing he did, as Mathis does.


Believe is for christians and pedestrians and of course it is my hobby to contradict you plus assumption is the mother of fuckuption. The eyes dominate the ears. In music the invention and transformations of figures is most important in musical composition, as well the deconstruction of old habits. Fact is what we can see is very limited, more limited than what we can hear, not even talking about an isolated quote from a composer bloke. I'm for adventure, invention and discovery, I don't limit myself. Here some quotes from other composers I don't give the names:

“The public doesn't want new music: the main thing it demands of a composer is that he be dead.”

“I haven't understood a bar of music in my life, but I have felt it.”

“Film music should have the same relationship to the film drama that somebody's piano playing in my living room has on the book I am reading.”

"My music doesn't need a movie"

"I'm not interested in music, I'm interested in the personality behind it"

“The aim of music is not to express feelings but to express music. It is not a vessel into which the composer distills his soul drop by drop, but a labyrinth with no beginning and no end, full of new paths to discover, where mystery remains eternal.”


_________________________________________________

Back to Dom's statement and question:

Dom wrote:
It's brilliant orchestral score and it has a great, modern...

Can anybody work out what's going on?


The abusive term: modern. The expressionm is fashionable. But for me it is not applicable to music, at best it stand for a pair of nice women shoes. The chronological art music doesn't deserve this term, maybe it can be used in popoular music, or movie soundtracks. I hear all detail in the "Suicide Ghost " by James Newton Howard and could write it down anytime if I had to, but I listen to it in a clearer quality at 44.1k on a compact disc.

.
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 15:55
by mathis
Joined on Sat, Feb 07 2004, Munich, Germany, Posts 1137
Angelo Clematide wrote:

“The aim of music is not to express feelings but to express music. It is not a vessel into which the composer distills his soul drop by drop, but a labyrinth with no beginning and no end, full of new paths to discover, where mystery remains eternal.”


Stravinski, isn't it?
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 18:43
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5726
No, that one is Boulez. A pretty good one.

I was looking for outrageously stupid statements by him, but found myself agreeing with some of them, damn it! I hate it when that happens.
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 20:27
by mathis
Joined on Sat, Feb 07 2004, Munich, Germany, Posts 1137
Hihi.. [Wink]
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 21:12
by clarkcontrol
Joined on Mon, May 03 2004, The Pagan Underground, Posts 315
WARNING!

I need for all of you to destroy all of your Wynton Marsalis recordings at once!

I attended a lecture/concert at my college years ago where Wynton was the guest speaker/performer. Man, what a let down. So full of himself, so sure of his condemnation of all music excepting his own preferences, etc.

The thing was, his opinions really didn't bother me. What bothered me was he was taking time away from his playing for us with all that stupid chatter. Shut up and play, mental-idiot-but-trumpet-giant!

Artists and composers should realize that what they say and think means nothing to me and people like me. I only like them for their music.

So my advice is to definitely study Boulez along with the others mentioned here. Who cares what he believed? I don't.

Wynton's Standard Time vol. 1 is great, BTW. The other stuff is a bit of a letdown.

Clark
Clark
Posted on Fri, Oct 13 2006 22:46
by Angelo Clematide
Joined on Thu, Sep 08 2005, Posts 1139
clarkcontrol wrote:
I need for all of you to destroy all of your Wynton Marsalis recordings at once!


I have to buy a Marsalis record first to throw it away. He is a excellent musician, but I can't stand the music he is playing. I can't get rid of the the feeling that I heard his sound years before Marsalis was born and certainly original from Miles. It sounds a if he plays Miles as a music theory.

.
Posted on Sat, Oct 14 2006 01:00
by William
Joined on Sun, Nov 24 2002, USA, Posts 5726
...
3 Pages123>
You cannot post new threads in this forum.
You cannot reply to threads in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.