# Epic Cinematic Scores - Is this considered "classical music"



## MagicMarker (Jul 23, 2011)

Hi, I'm not very familiar with classical music, so bear with me... 
I'm only just starting to get into kind of music.

I always thought that "classical music" describes a piece that is purely orchestral and contains no vocals.. But, the other day, I was told that epic cinematic scores are not considered to be classical music. Is this true? If so, why? What exactly is the difference?

Here is an example:





I really like this type of orchestration..
If you could suggest any similar scores, it would be much appreciated. I want to hear a piece that is LONG.. not a couple of minutes in length. They're difficult to find (especially for someone who's new to this kind of music.)

I don't want to start a genre war..


----------



## MagicMarker (Jul 23, 2011)

Also, do choral-style vocals fall under classical music?

Is this song not "classical" either?





Can modern composers (I mean within the last 30 years) ever write traditionally classical music?
Examples?


----------



## Comistra (Feb 27, 2010)

> I always thought that "classical music" describes a piece that is purely orchestral and contains no vocals.. But, the other day, I was told that epic cinematic scores are not considered to be classical music. Is this true? If so, why? What exactly is the difference?


One might cynically say that the difference is that cinematic scores are popular (relatively speaking) and thus cannot be classical.

Being purely orchestral is not enough to define classical, because-many people would say-chamber music or solo pieces (think piano sonatas) count as classical, too.

Defining "classical", assuming you don't mean the Classical period, is impossible. Too many people have ideas about what is or isn't classical. I see no particular reason to say that orchestral music composed for the silver screen is _not_ classical. The fact that it was done commercially is not a knock, because many undoubtedly classical composers (e.g. Mozart) got paid to write music, too. I think it's just snobbery that would cause one to say that movie scores are not classical.

To paraphrase Justice Potter Stewart, I cannot define classical music, but I know it when I hear it; and we all have our own ideas about where the boundaries are.


----------



## LordBlackudder (Nov 13, 2010)

You usually refer to a genre under the main branch name like jazz, rock. You can further define it to 80's rock or for classical romanticism but usually this is not necessary.

So I think the music you posted is classical. And you could be more specific with contemporary classical.


----------



## BradPiano (Dec 22, 2011)

Nearly all cinematic scores use thematic transformation, the manipulating of a theme into something completely different and almost contradictory to the original theme. This was first used by Liszt and Berlioz. So as long as you're not referring to the classical era, this could definitely be considered classical.


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

But it's not. Probably because the intent was not to make a work of art.


----------



## BradPiano (Dec 22, 2011)

Rasa said:


> But it's not. Probably because the intent was not to make a work of art.


You don't think that any movie score can be considered classical?


----------



## MagicMarker (Jul 23, 2011)

Rasa said:


> But it's not. Probably because the intent was not to make a work of art.


What? Are you saying that a piece is only considered classical if the composer made it purely for the "art" of making music? If so, why can't classical music be created for the purpose of evoking/stimulating/expressing emotion? Isn't that what it does at the end of the day? And why don't you recognise cinematic scores to be "artistic"?


----------



## BradPiano (Dec 22, 2011)

I guess genre is in the eye of the beholder. Now that I look back at it, Liszt was trying to abandon classical styles when developing this thematic transformation, but if we listen to his music, we consider it to be classical (at least, most people do).

So I consider your music to be classical mostly because it can't really be classified as anything else, but as LordBlackudder said, it would be considered "contemporary classical".


----------



## jalex (Aug 21, 2011)

BradPiano said:


> Nearly all cinematic scores use thematic transformation, the manipulating of a theme into something completely different and almost contradictory to the original theme. This was first used by Liszt and Berlioz. So as long as you're not referring to the classical era, this could definitely be considered classical.


Nearly all pop songs use tonal harmony. This began to be used by classical composers in the early 17th century. All pop music could be considered classical.


----------



## BradPiano (Dec 22, 2011)

jalex said:


> Nearly all pop songs use tonal harmony. This began to be used by classical composers in the early 17th century. All pop music could be considered classical.


Lol. Like I said in my more recent post, it's all in the eye of the beholder, really.


----------



## Rasa (Apr 23, 2009)

MagicMarker said:


> What? Are you saying that a piece is only considered classical if the composer made it purely for the "art" of making music? If so, why can't classical music be created for the purpose of evoking/stimulating/expressing emotion? Isn't that what it does at the end of the day? And why don't you recognise cinematic scores to be "artistic"?


scarp purely.

And this score: no. Mostly because it's a painful compilation of genre clichés.


----------



## Ravellian (Aug 17, 2009)

How about this: It is if you want it to be. Obviously the borders of classical and pop music aren't very clearly defined. I don't like the word "classical" anyway when referring to music, since the word tends to have negative connotations (like "old," "obsolete") that obviously doesn't apply to "contemporary classical" works by modern composers... and many techniques used by dead composers are definitely not obsolete.

At the most, I'd just call it "orchestral" music... but instead of worrying about what to call something, just enjoy it if you like it.


----------



## MagicMarker (Jul 23, 2011)

Does anyone have a "favourite" cinematic score? 
I'd love to hear it.


----------



## Kopachris (May 31, 2010)

MagicMarker said:


> Does anyone have a "favourite" cinematic score?
> I'd love to hear it.


Hans Zimmer's score for _Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End_ or Michael Giacchino's for _Star Trek_ are my favorites.

I wrote up a blog post a while ago which defined classical music based on a couple different non-musical factors, but most people around here disagree with my conclusion. I'll just copypasta the excerpt of the blog post here and leave it up to you to form your own definition:



Kopachris said:


> To begin with, we must define classical music. What is it, exactly? We know what distinguishes rock from pop from jazz, but what makes music classical? It's a common misconception that any incidental music (e.g. film scores), any orchestral music, or any piano music is classical. It's also a misconception that classical music must necessarily be "old," as there are people alive who compose what is considered to be classical music. The most common definition that will be given to you by classical-heads is that "classical music" is synonymous with "art music," that is, music which is created as art instead of entertainment. However, this can also be misleading, as music which we consider classical was usually written for entertainment during the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries. True, it was also considered art, but it was written primarily for entertaining, especially during the Classical period itself: chamber music was written to entertain wealthy nobles in their homes, opera was written to entertain the variety of people who could come to the theater, piano music was written for individuals to entertain their friends. . . .
> 
> A much better definition of classical music concentrates on the forms and ideas that the music is based on, or rather, the variety present within those forms and ideas. Since the Medieval era, people took note not only of the music itself, but how it was created. They made rules that had to be followed to create music. Throughout the Renaissance and the Baroque era, those rules evolved. During the Classical, Romantic, and Modern eras, those rules were more and more frequently broken. Therefore, classical music is music which is necessarily created out of an understanding of a given set of rules which are meant to be broken and evolve over time.
> 
> ...


----------



## regressivetransphobe (May 16, 2011)

It's orchestral fluff. Call it what you will, but it's a bit of an insult to classical to call it that.


----------



## Rapide (Oct 11, 2011)

MagicMarker said:


> Hi, I'm not very familiar with classical music, so bear with me...
> I'm only just starting to get into kind of music.
> 
> I always thought that "classical music" describes a piece that is purely orchestral and contains no vocals.. But, the other day, I was told that epic cinematic scores are not considered to be classical music. Is this true? If so, why? What exactly is the difference?
> ...


Sorry. i don't consider that piece as modern art music.


----------



## ComposerOfAvantGarde (Dec 2, 2011)

If you want good film music, listen to Michael Nyman's music for Peter Greenaway's film "The Draughtsman's Contract."


----------

