# NACM: Fire Emblem music



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

NACM means "Not accademical classical music" or, if you prefer, "Not accredited classical music".

Keep in mind that if there is the label "NACM" in the title one of my thread it means that it contains a piece of music with following carachteristics:
- It sounds like classical music
- The composer has not an accademical credit
- It doesn't belong to the so called "high culture"

Often, NACM are short but pleasant pieces of music which don't follow the rigid formalism of accademical classical music (like for example "symphonies with four movements" and so on).

That said, if you like NACM and you are not one of those conservative elitists who think that if you are not Beethoven you have no value and your music is bad, you could appreciate what I'll post today.

When I was a kid, I used to be a fan of Nintendo for videogames. The music composed by Hiroki Morishita for the low-selling videogame "Fire Emblem" explains why today I'm a fan of Nintendo for music.

I know that many persons in this forum already know the good NACM produced for videogames like Zelda, but we are speaking about a top game who sells millions and millions of copies.
The thing that is impressive is the effort that Nintendo puts even for the music in low-selling videogames like "Fire Emblem". Not even Hollywood produces so good music for average films.

It's funny and sad at the same time that the music of a low-selling videogame has a higher quality than the average high-selling commercial music: it shows where musical industry has gone. If many years ago commercial music used to mean "light music" like Frank Sinatra (which had a quality), I think that today it simply means "junk music".

I like how Nintendo shows to kids who buy their videogames that something else exists outside of the galaxy of music industry.

How do you rate this piece? If you want, you can vote in the poll.






And for people who prefer instrumental music...






And for people who prefer "chamber music"...


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Sounds like poop to my ears, and I enjoy soundtrack music, like James Horner. Not sure about NACM.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

You are certainly loading your thread with comments such as 'not academical', 'high culture' and 'conservative elitist', I suspect that most of the reasonably well regarded works of the last 100+ years ... even 70 years ... come from composers who didn't fit those criteria.


----------



## Xisten267 (Sep 2, 2018)

Frankly, the best designation of this that came to mind while listening (I saw the three videos) is "pop classical", if such term makes sense. I think that it resembles a bit the style of late romantic light music, particularly that of Ketèlbey, for it's emphasis on melody and orchestration over other aspects of music such as form, texture (counterpoint), dynamics etc. I don't dislike it, but it doesn't impress me. And I say this as someone who deeply respect John Williams and enjoy (some) videogame music.

I marked "It's not bad".


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

The samples above all seem to have a very surface level understanding of classical music from well over a 100 years ago. But no real depth. 

Sorry, but the term "Pablum" comes to my mind.

As video game soundtrack, it is fine, but beyond that, I don't hear much value. 

There have been more than a few self taught classical composers, producing music with real depth, beyond the surface veneer I hear in the samples above.

Arnold Schoenberg, Toru Takemitsu, Edward Elgar, Havergal Brian, Georg Philipp Telemann, Salvatore Sciarrino, Rimsky-Korsakov, were self taught composers.


----------



## gregorx (Jan 25, 2020)

I voted it's horrible, but only because I really feel it is. Plus, those two women in the last video are kind of creepy. I've heard video game music that is much better than this.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Ethereality said:


> Sounds like poop to my ears, and I enjoy soundtrack music, like James Horner. Not sure about NACM.


I like James Horner too, as well as many others film music composers like John Williams, Alan Silvestri, Thomas Newman and Hans Zimmer.


----------



## Varick (Apr 30, 2014)

Yeah, it leaves much to be desired. Just because there is a large orchestra to play the music, does not mean it is WORTH (artistically) a large orchestra to play it. Certainly doesn't ring my bell. But that's what makes a ball game.

V


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Becca said:


> You are certainly loading your thread with comments such as 'not academical', 'high culture' and 'conservative elitist', I suspect that most of the reasonably well regarded works of the last 100+ years ... even 70 years ... come from composers who didn't fit those criteria.


Yes, but indeed you are speaking about "well regarded composers". With NACM I mean "composers" who are not in this list.

In reality NACM composers have an audience, but they're ignored inside the field of "academic classical music", maybe because they neither want to compose the kind of pieces they would have to compose to be in the list. 
For example, many composers got a job in the field of film scores and they are probably happy of what they are doing, even if they know that their work is not well regarded from the academic music world.

There is still a bias towards film scores, so what can you expect when it comes to videogames?
Take the poll for example: why are so many people voting "horrible"? It's because the piece is really horrible, or it's because they have a bias towards music of videogames? I don't know. I would expect many votes in the middle and only a few votes at the extreme parts of the scale ("horrible" and "excellent"). 
I suspect that there are other reasons behind a so extreme vote, because usually my ears are quite in the "average", which means that for example I like the film scores which won the academy awards.


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

Also horrible, in a few years time all will be forgotten .


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

HansZimmer said:


> I like James Horner too, as well as many others film music composers like John Williams, Alan Silvestri, Thomas Newman and Hans Zimmer.


I think the composer of that piece above just didn't work hard enough to stand out. No one can say how film or game music will be remembered in 100 years, for example, when those saw _The Lion King_ in theatres in 1994 did it ever occur to them that kids in 300 years might still be watching it? Well similar to Classical, perhaps no film director will ever _want_ to put as much attention and passion into such a film, that it keeps a kind of legendary status within our current culture. And if it can retranslate itself from the boundaries of one culture into another, it will remain for a long time. People will forget about the culture surrounding the art, and just intuit what the art is saying, like a distant message. If the message is hits on more cylinders, it will pervade its original context, that's what I mean by the composer needs to work harder to stand out. So what a good soundtrack composer does, aside from borrowing a lot from the others, is attempt to make their score stand out. So much music sounds the same, that when a particularly well-produced score like _Titanic, A New Hope_, or _Final Fantasy VI_ fits a very specific niche of listening, people want to keep coming back, because no one else quite does it like that, similar to _Classical_ composers, perhaps no one quite _wants_ to do it like that anymore. The culture is lost. The past is the past and your heart won't allow you to recreate and relive that culture. The code is lost, but if a more human message impacts us at its root, the art behind the code is still decipherable. So music, whether Classical, soundtrack or pop, fitting a unique niche and culture has a lot of impact on people for its time. If it can claim it's own territory, and keep that territory, people will remember it.


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> There is still a bias towards film scores, so what can you expect when it comes to videogames?
> Take the poll for example: why are so many people voting "horrible"? It's because the piece is really horrible, or it's because they have a bias towards music of videogames? I don't know. I would expect many votes in the middle and only a few votes at the extreme parts of the scale ("horrible" and "excellent").


Keep in mind that you are the one who came up with the "horrible" category. It isn't horrible music; I've heard a lot worse. I'll just say that I have no interest in hearing it again.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Xisten267 said:


> Frankly, the best designation of this that came to mind while listening (I saw the three videos) is "pop classical"


I see that many classical music listeners are confused about what the word "pop" means.

"Pop" is a kind of music, like rock, jazz, rap and so on...

This is pop.






I read that many people, when they hear pieces/composers of classical music which/who prefer catchiness rather than complexity, say that it's pop music, which is wrong because pop has other distinctive elements.

In reality there isn't any definition of classical music according to which repetition and homophony/monophony is forbidden, otherwise many accredited pieces of classical music would stop to be classical music immediately.

The problem is that many people use the word "classical" as a synonym of "good", and so when they think that a classical music piece is bad they call it "pop", so that in the "classical" category everything is good.

I think that this definition makes no sense. It makes more sense to consider "classical music" as a kind of music like rock, pop, jazz and so on... and to admit that inside the genre can exist bad music.



> I think that it resembles a bit the style of late romantic light music


Yes, this is indeed the right definition.

Light music is a subgenre of classical music where composers have the goal to produce short and melodically intense pieces of music. Their philosophy is catchiness over complexity.

Probably many persons here think that light music is intrinsically bad and voted "horrible" not because the piece sounds really horrible, but because it is simple.

Remember what is light music and what is his goal! You should judge the piece inside of his scope!


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

HansZimmer said:


> I see that many classical music listeners ....
> 
> I read that many people ....
> 
> ...


You assume too much about what other's think and then argue with these imaginary opinions.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> You assume too much about what other's think and then argue with these imaginary opinions.


Only the last one is an assumption. The first three are things that I've read many times.

So yes, the last one is an assumption. I simply think that it's strange that to most people the piece sounds not simply "so so", but even "horrible", because I usually like melodies that most people like.
Therefore I suspect that there is something else behind this so negative judgement, as for example that it's light music produced for a videogame.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

HansZimmer said:


> Only the last one is an assumption. The first three are things that I've read many times.


Read where? Aside from your post I don't think I've ever seen those opinions expressed in the way you claim.


----------



## Becca (Feb 5, 2015)

HansZimmer said:


> Therefore I suspect that there is something else behind this so negative judgement, as for example that it's light music produced for a videogame.


Just because others don't share your opinions is no reason to go assuming that they have negative biases


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> Read where? Aside from your post I don't think I've ever seen those opinions expressed in the way you claim.


Here for example: https://www.talkclassical.com/8114-great-controversy.html#post86154

And in the discussion many people say the same thing: that the music of Allevi is pop.

I've read the same thing many times in youtube and in italian forums.

It seems that some people are confused about what is pop music. I'm not saying that it's your case, of course.

Indeed, I think that Allevi stays in the category of "light (classical) music". Good or bad light music? I don't know. Everyone has his own tastes.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

HansZimmer said:


> Here for example: https://www.talkclassical.com/8114-great-controversy.html#post86154
> 
> And in the discussion many people say the same thing: that the music of Allevi is pop.
> 
> ...


First that thread is over ten years old. Second, what difference does it make if you think it is "light classical music" and others think of it as "pop"? Labels have nothing to do with quality, i.e. music called Classical is not inherently better than music called Pop, at least IMO.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

SanAntone said:


> First that thread is over ten years old. Second, what difference does it make if you think it is "light classical music" and others think of it as "pop"? Labels have nothing to do with quality, i.e. music called Classical is not inherently better than music called Pop, at least IMO.


Indeed it's correct what you say: quality has nothing to do with the genre. You can compose a good pop song and a bad classical piece.
You have to ask to those people why do they have to label classical music that they think is of low quality as "pop".


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

HansZimmer said:


> Indeed it's correct what you say: quality has nothing to do with the genre. You can compose a good pop song and a bad classical piece.
> You have to ask to those people why do they have to label classical music that they think is of low quality as "pop".


I don't have any interest in how people think of Classical music compared to other genres, and it doesn't matter to me if they claim that Classical music (as they define it) is superior to Pop, or film or video game music. I suggest that you detach from that debate as well.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Why is it that members of a Classical Music forum must be schooled that it is no better than any other music. Personally, while I think it is more sophisticated and complex than almost any other music, I don’t use the term ‘better than’ because popular and film music have been very important in my music-listening experience, but I assume that some people who gravitate to this forum feel that CM is better than any other music in their experience. What a surprise!


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Becca said:


> Just because others don't share your opinions is no reason to go assuming that they have negative biases


If my assumptions are wrong, the "no" voters can explain why would the piece be horrible. Is the melody horrible?


----------



## Bulldog (Nov 21, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> If my assumptions are wrong, the "no" voters can explain why would the piece be horrible. Is the melody horrible?


Those who voted "horrible" had no choice given the parameters that you set up. It's all on you.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> If my assumptions are wrong, the "no" voters can explain why would the piece be horrible. Is the melody horrible?


The melody is not exactly horrible, but to my ears, it is just plain kitschy, vulgar* and cheesy. Which to me, is worse than if the melody was horrible.

*lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

DaveM said:


> Why is it that members of a Classical Music forum must be schooled that it is no better than any other music. Personally, while I think it is more sophisticated and complex than almost any other music, I don't use the term 'better than' because popular and film music have been very important in my music-listening experience, but I assume that some people who gravitate to this forum feel that CM is better than any other music in their experience. What a surprise!


Indeed your point is correct: "more sophisticated" in the arts doesn't necessarily mean better, and this consideration is valid inside classical music too.

For example, the third and last movement of the "Moonlight Sonata" of Beethoven has a lot of repetition, but this doesn't mean that it's bad. There are probably other piano sonatas that have less repetition and more development but are weaker.

What I want to say is that I don't agree with those persons who think that "more complex" means better. Arts are about emotion, not about complexity. 
So, those persons who say that film scores are bad because they are light classical music and not sophisticated classical music are wrong, because if a film score gives you emotions then has an artistic value for you.

My opinion is that complexity means quality only when it comes to arrange. On the other hand, I think that the same is not valid for the composition part (creating a melody), because it's simply not true that a more complex melody necessarily sounds better or give more emotions than a simple melody. 
There examples of great melodies which are not sophisticated.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Simon Moon said:


> The melody is not exactly horrible, but to my ears, it is just plain kitschy, vulgar* and cheesy. Which to me, is worse than if the melody was horrible.
> 
> *lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined.


I understand what you say. You can't connect with the melody because you prefer an other kind of melodies.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Bulldog said:


> Those who voted "horrible" had no choice given the parameters that you set up. It's all on you.


So, are you saying that if I created a scale from 0 to 5, some people who voted "horrible" wouldn't vote 0? For example, what would be your vote in this other scale?


----------



## Highwayman (Jul 16, 2018)

HansZimmer said:


> So, are you saying that if I created a scale from 0 to 5, some people who voted "horrible" wouldn't vote 0? For example, what would be your vote in this other scale?


There is a big difference between "horrible" and "not bad". I might have chosen an intermediate option if there was any. The piece is inoffensive to my ears so I don`t know if such a strong word like horrible is accurate. But I know it`s _not_ not bad...


----------



## Coach G (Apr 22, 2020)

The music is OK, and the musicians seem to be very talented; especially the ones in the first video. I wouldn't spend money on it, but it's not THAT bad.


----------



## gregorx (Jan 25, 2020)

I think you got pretty much the result and response you expected. NACM isn't a real thing, it's made up. Call it something else and leave classical music out of it and save yourself the agony of having to try to explain it. There is more to classical music than instrumentation. Like I said, I've heard some pretty good video game music, I think you could have done better.

You asked me what I think and I said I think it's horrible. And since you are championing its cause as some form of classical music, well, I have an opinion on classical music. I think Simon Moon described it very well. It didn't help that video #1 sounds like a show tune, and #2 a theme from a TV Western, and #3, well, I've already said enough about #3. I think there is such a thing as bad music, and I think this is a good example of it.


----------



## janxharris (May 24, 2010)

HansZimmer said:


> What I want to say is that I don't agree with those persons who think that "more complex" means better.


Who are 'those persons'?


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

DaveM said:


> Why is it that members of a Classical Music forum must be schooled that it is no better than any other music.


"Why is it that members of a Classical Music forum who also enjoy and like to discuss other genres must be schooled that CM is superior to all other genres?"

I suspect your question and mine both carry a degree of exaggeration as well as a degree of truth.


----------



## Philidor (11 mo ago)

To my mind, it is "music", but it is not "art". 

The same way as McDonald is selling "food" but is not a gourmet restaurant.

Many people tried to define "art" and I would certainly fail if I added another try, but there should be some existential aspect with the music in order to call it "art" ... think for Tristan or Schubert Quintet or Beethoven op. 111 ... 

So the examples shown are neither "bad" nor "good" to me. They just do not belong to what I like to hear. Whether they are good with respect to the function of that music (and there should be some function) or whether they are good or bad in terms of craftmanship, I don't know. Superficially heard, they are sounding nice. Not being a problem to grasp.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

HansZimmer said:


> NACM means "Not accademical classical music" or, if you prefer, "Not accredited classical music".
> 
> Keep in mind that if there is the label "NACM" in the title one of my thread it means that it contains a piece of music with following carachteristics:
> - It sounds like classical music
> ...


Hans, I listened to the instrumental piece. My take on it is one of tired commercial cliche. That's not a bad thing given the utility and musical expectation needed for the medium but this really was too predictable for my tastes as a standalone piece away from its real world function. I'm glad you qualified the definitions of NACM as they certainly apply here, especially the lack of high culture imv.

Let me explain my meaning in that last sentence. For me high culture _in concert hall music_ partially implies a minimum of technical proficiency and even better, mastery on the part of the composer in the sense that the more the composer knows, the closer he/she can get to a more profound and personal utterance because they will have more choices with which to impose their personality. This inward quest by the composer to search for themselves a personal music is also a contributing factor towards a definition of high culture (no, I don't like that expressions implications so I'll stick to concert hall music), and the resulting profundity is what many listeners will be drawn to imv. This aspect is lacking for me in the piece I listened to.

In my time composing for media, I worked with and knew many composers who where untrained and yet 'wrote' some wonderful music for the medium so I am not against untrained composers per se, as some of my favourite music is by non-academic writers. So there is no elitism from me here unless of course you consider academic training to be elite, which of course it isn't because one has to fundamentally be driven, autodidactic and able to rely on one's own wits in order to learn and do composing. (Btw, that training, aided by adrenalin and coffee, gave me (and others) the facility to rattle off music like your example within hours for tight deadlines - no profound inner searching or waiting for inspiration required thanks to the musical expectations of commissioning clients).

Given your forum name, you are probably aware that Zimmer gets a lot of bashing from Williams fans and although I'm a Williams fan, I think Zimmer is exceptional too, just not in a concert hall setting. His use of any and all elements from live players to a DAW's manipulative capabilities in scores has opened up such a vast canvas for film scorers. Do you know this forum..https://www.vi-control.net/community/...Zimmer himself often posts there.


----------



## Simon Moon (Oct 10, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> I see that many classical music listeners are confused about what the word "pop" means.
> 
> "Pop" is a kind of music, like rock, jazz, rap and so on...


This is not completely true.

The most used definition of pop music, is music written for the masses, where crafting a catchy, easy to sing along to, with hooks, and simple form (usually verse>chorus>bridge form. repeat).

Jazz, especially post-bop, fusion, avant-garde, and progressive forms of jazz, are no closer to pop music, than anything Elliott Carter, Bartok, Schoenberg, Ligeti, Penderecki, composed. Jazz has not stood still since the days it _was_ the most popular type of music.

And the same can be said for a lot of music that falls under the loose purview that is rock. Avant-prog is just one such form of rock, that has nothing in common with anything commonly referred to as "pop".


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

Simon Moon said:


> This is not completely true.
> 
> The most used definition of pop music, is music written for the masses, where crafting a catchy, easy to sing along to, with hooks, and simple form (usually verse>chorus>bridge form. repeat).
> 
> ...


My interpretation of "_Pop" is a kind of music, like rock, jazz, rap and so on_.." is that Pop is a kind of music just as those others are a kind of music rather than 'Pop' is 'like' those others in some way.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Simon Moon said:


> This is not completely true.
> 
> The most used definition of pop music, is music written for the masses, where crafting a catchy, easy to sing along to, with hooks, and simple form (usually verse>chorus>bridge form. repeat).
> 
> ...


Pop is a specific kind of music.






You are confusing "popular music" with "pop music".

"Popular music" contains pop music, rock music, dance music, rap music and so on...

"Folk music" is the music of the local traditions.
This one, for example, it's "spanish folk music".






This other one is "swiss folk music".






Finally, there is art music, which contains "baroque music", "classical music", "romantic music", "modern music" and "contemporary music".

Now, what about "light classical music"? Maybe it could be classified as "popular music", but not as "pop music", because pop music is a genre of music and light music an other one.

Orchestrated film and videogame music that sounds "classical" is probably light classical music.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

gregorx said:


> I think you got pretty much the result and response you expected. NACM isn't a real thing, it's made up. Call it something else and leave classical music out of it and save yourself the agony of having to try to explain it. There is more to classical music than instrumentation.


It's easy to say what is not classical music, but it's much more difficult to define what is classical music and what is the genre of orchestrated music of films and videogames.

Many people try to give a definition to it, but they obviously fail:
- No, it's not "film music", because film music is not a genre of music. Indeed, film music can be of every genre.

- No, it's not new-age music, because new-age is music for meditation, and the "Imperial March" of John Williams is for sure not music for meditation

- No, it's not elevator or lounge music

- No, it's not pop music. Elton John is pop music.

It's true that NACM is a word invented by me, but an other word exists to define what I want to define: light music.

_The British light music composer Ernest Tomlinson stated that the main distinction of light music is its emphasis on melody.[11] This is certainly a major feature of the genre, although the creation of distinctive musical textures in scoring is another aim, for example the close harmony of Robert Farnon or Ronald Binge's "cascading string" effect, which later became associated with the "sustained hum of Mantovani's reverberated violins".[12] Lyndon Jenkins describes the genre as "original orchestral pieces, often descriptive but in many cases simply three or four minutes of music with an arresting main theme and a contrasting middle section."[5]

David Ades suggests that "it is generally agreed that it occupies a position between classical and popular music, yet its boundaries are often blurred"_

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_music

Now, inside "light music" you can find wonderful pieces, therefore I don't consider it as "inferior" in respect to canonical classical music. It's different, not inferior.



> Like I said, I've heard some pretty good video game music, I think you could have done better.


For example?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

janxharris said:


> Who are 'those persons'?


Are you asking for an exhaustive list of things that I've read here and there in the web?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

mikeh375 said:


> Hans, I listened to the instrumental piece. My take on it is one of tired commercial cliche. That's not a bad thing given the utility and musical expectation needed for the medium but this really was too predictable for my tastes as a standalone piece away from its real world function. I'm glad you qualified the definitions of NACM as they certainly apply here, especially the lack of high culture imv.


We probably found a better word in the discussion: light music.

When I say that something is NACM or light music must no be considered an offense. Indeed, you say that you are a fan of John Williams. Do you know that John Williams produces light music, right?

You can say that you prefer the light music produced by John Williams rather than the light music of Hiroki Morishita, but they are both in the field of light music.
It seems that many users here don't like the kind of melodies composed by Morishita, but it's a question of tastes, and not a question of objective quality.
Indeed, there are many persons (me included) who like melodies of Morishita, but if you think that it sounds like a "western film" (like someone said) and you consider this as an offense I can't do nothing.

To me it doesn't sound like western, but like "epic medieval". I don't know what is the average age of people in this forum, but young people like me are used to this type of things, we like it.

I think that the question is that if you listen to Mozart you feel that it's music written in 1700 (melodies were written for the hears of people of that time), while if you listen to modern composers who have a young audience you feel that is music of 2022.

I hope that I have not to explain that if classical and light composers want that this kind of music remains alive they will have to understand what are the kind of melodies/sounds that young people of today like. 
It they're not be able to modernize classical/light music, then future and present generations will listen to other kinds of music.



> Given your forum name, you are probably aware that Zimmer gets a lot of bashing from Williams fans and although I'm a Williams fan, I think Zimmer is exceptional too, just not in a concert hall setting. His use of any and all elements from live players to a DAW's manipulative capabilities in scores has opened up such a vast canvas for film scorers. Do you know this forum..https://www.vi-control.net/community/...Zimmer himself often posts there.


I don't know why John Williams fans bash Hans Zimmer, but I'm not surprised of that. I mean, there are always battles between the fans of two different artist.

I'm not interested about those insipid dissings, because I think that both Williams and Zimmer have composed great pieces, although my favourite film score at the moment is the one of "Lion King" (Hans Zimmer).

I know that Zimmer is a progressist in his field and not a conservative, so he uses modern instruments to compose. Conservative people will probably bash him for that, but it doesn't matter to me. I look at the results, not at the method.

The important thing is that if I go to a concert there's a live orchestra, and the live perfomance of Lion King is wonderful.






What do you mean when you say that Hans Zimmer is good but not in the concert Hall? If you wanted to say that Zimmer is not able to conduct and play an instrument at a good level you are probably right, but if you wanted to say that his music is weak when extracted from films I dont' agree.

Like the music of John Williams, the music of Hanz Zimmer can stay alone.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Who is the user who voted "excellent"?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Varick said:


> Yeah, it leaves much to be desired. Just because there is a large orchestra to play the music, does not mean it is WORTH (artistically) a large orchestra to play it. Certainly doesn't ring my bell. But that's what makes a ball game.
> 
> V


If you like the melody (and I like the simple chamber performance) then it is WORTH a large ochestra, because an orchestral arrangement is richer, stronger.

Of course the orchestral arrangement has been done for people who like the base composition, not for people who don't like it.


----------



## Ethereality (Apr 6, 2019)

Everything about The Lion King is OP...needs to be nerfed. Btw this is the best suite I think:


----------



## Rogerx (Apr 27, 2018)

HansZimmer said:


> Who is the user who voted "excellent"?


I guess that will always be a mystery, next time use the name display option.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

As someone who voted 'horrible' I was kinda forced to do so. In truth it wasn't 'horrible' but there wasn't a box that said 'unoriginal, boring, kitschy, highly derivative and just plain cheesy' (thanks Simon Moon, I was looking for a perfect descriptor and that was it). To me it sounded like it was trying to be something it wasnt - well written. If you asked the regular person in the street what kind of music it was they'd say "classical". However, as many people on this site can testify, what passes for 'classical' amongst the populace is not classical at all but some sort of fake version of it. A bit like the difference between professionally cooked Thai noodles and Super Noodles. I'll admit I have rather a dim view of this type of overtly melody-obsessive faux-classical stuff. It sticks in my throat as much as Andre Rieux, James Last and any other such slop but each to their own. So, horrible? No! Cheesy, uninspiring, vacuous drivel - yes!


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

HansZimmer said:


> We probably found a better word in the discussion: light music.
> 
> When I say that something is NACM or light music must no be considered an offense. Indeed, you say that you are a fan of John Williams. Do you know that John Williams produces light music, right?.........
> 
> ...


John Williams has a decent concert work output which you may or not be aware of and no, I don't generally consider JW 'light' to the extent that 'Fire Emblem' is. In fact to my ears every bar that Williams has written - for concert hall and film - displays technical and musical integrity borne of training and ability, qualities which I admire and unfortunately fail to perceive in your example.

Regarding objective qualities and taste, I would normally agree that taste is more decisive and no less valid in forming opinions, but when considering orchestral music and actual orchestration, there are qualitative, technical and (objective) professional standards that apply in order to be competent or better at the discipline. These standards can only be acquired through study and training which is lacking in much orchestral media music composing and by implication NACM. If NACM works are primarlly written to stay within a DAW then there is no issue for me.

Here is an example of JW's music that is beyond the expressive scope of untrained composers. You may or may not like it but just the first minute or so will bring you to the conclusion that the utterance here is way beyond 'light'.






BTW You might want to check out the link in this thread below. Zimmer in particular is known for his 'school' or team of composers that contribute cues to scores and one wonders if you are certain that when listening to him, it is actually all him? I'll add that if composers are treated fairly, I have no problem with the practice of 'all hands to the pump' as I personally know how demanding and absurd film and other media score deadlines can be. I even considered applying for a position at Remote Control once (along with many thousands more no doubt), when he sent out a general invitation to become a 'Zimling'.

It is interesting though that JW does not need help to compose cues nor does he need a DAW, such is the power of learning the craft fully because not doing so limits a composer's expressive reach in orchestral/concert hall music and possibly contributes much in the way of detriment to their own potential.

Film Composers and the devastating impact of the DAW and the internet


----------



## chipia (Apr 22, 2021)

People here call the music in the OP horrible because it's "melody-obsessive" or is not formally complex, but then again, alot of classical music, e.g. Mozart is also very melody-focused. And the piece actually has some chromatic twists, especially the outro, that I wouldn't necessarily call "predictable".

If this piece was revealed to be a fragment of a lost Mozart or Verdi Opera, I'm sure the poll would look very different.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Ethereality said:


> Everything about The Lion King is OP...needs to be nerfed.


Why?



> Btw this is the best suite I think:


This is good, but it contains only the songs, not the score. The score is the best part of the music of Lion King.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> NACM means "Not accademical classical music" or, if you prefer, "Not accredited classical music".
> 
> Keep in mind that if there is the label "NACM" in the title one of my thread it means that it contains a piece of music with following carachteristics:
> - It sounds like classical music
> ...


One thing I'd like to know is whether the people who make this music make money out of it -- what I'm getting at is this, does it work as a capital generating commodity?


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

HansZimmer said:


> Yes, but indeed you are speaking about "well regarded composers". With NACM I mean "composers" who are not in this list.
> 
> In reality NACM composers have an audience, but they're ignored inside the field of "academic classical music", maybe because they neither want to compose the kind of pieces they would have to compose to be in the list.
> For example, many composers got a job in the field of film scores and they are probably happy of what they are doing, even if they know that their work is not well regarded from the academic music world.
> ...


I have the feeling that you are the one that's biased because you obviously loved the game as a kid and have fond memories of it and of the soundtrack


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

chipia said:


> People here call the music in the OP horrible because it's "melody-obsessive" or is not formally complex, but then again, alot of classical music, e.g. Mozart is also very melody-focused. And the piece actually has some chromatic twists, especially the outro, that I wouldn't necessarily call "predictable".
> 
> If this piece was revealed to be a fragment of a lost Mozart or Verdi Opera, I'm sure the poll would look very different.


Mozart wasn't just melody focused, he also had a great understanding of counterpoint, harmony and a dozen other things that are the reason that he is regarded as one of the best composers of all time. Are you seriously, willingly, unashamedly, making this comparison?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Mandryka said:


> One thing I'd like to know is whether the people who make this music make money out of it -- what I'm getting at is this, does it work as a capital generating commodity?


They have a job in Nintendo, so they get a salary.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> They have a job in Nintendo, so they get a salary.


Is Nintendo paying them to write this? If so, why? If not, is it making money for them? And if it isn't making money for them, why have they chosen to make this sort of music?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

EvaBaron said:


> I have the feeling that you are the one that's biased because you obviously loved the game as a kid and have fond memories of it and of the soundtrack


No, I have never played this game, neither I want. I'm not attracted at all to this game.

On the other hand I played very much Mario Kart and Mario Party, but I see the music of these two games as irrelevant: it's just background music. I only like soundtracks that can be extracted from a game or film as standalone music. 
I think that the soundtrack of Fire Emblem is a good example of a good soundtrack that can be extracted from the game. Indeed, I like the music but not the game.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

I just listened to it and it was a nice piece of music but I wouldn’t define it as classical


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Mandryka said:


> Is Nintendo paying them to write this? If so, why? If not, is it making money for them? And if it isn't making money for them, why have they chosen to make this sort of music?


I don't understand your question. Nintendo creates music for the videogames and has a few composers who obviously get a salary like all other workers.
Today, Nintendo uses often orchestras for the soundtracks like Hollywood. In old videogames they were not able to do so cause of tecnological limits, so the sounds were programmed inside the videogames and therefore videogames used to have that creepy 8-bit music.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Merl said:


> As someone who voted 'horrible' I was kinda forced to do so. In truth it wasn't 'horrible' but there wasn't a box that said 'unoriginal, boring, kitschy, highly derivative and just plain cheesy' (thanks Simon Moon, I was looking for a perfect descriptor and that was it). To me it sounded like it was trying to be something it wasnt - well written. If you asked the regular person in the street what kind of music it was they'd say "classical". However, as many people on this site can testify, what passes for 'classical' amongst the populace is not classical at all but some sort of fake version of it. A bit like the difference between professionally cooked Thai noodles and Super Noodles. I'll admit I have rather a dim view of this type of overtly melody-obsessive faux-classical stuff. It sticks in my throat as much as Andre Rieux, James Last and any other such slop but each to their own. So, horrible? No! Cheesy, uninspiring, vacuous drivel - yes!





EvaBaron said:


> I just listened to it and it was a nice piece of music but I wouldn't define it as classical


The problem is that, first of all, you have to define what is classical music.

Many persons say that classical music doesn't simply mean "orchestrated music", but I don't agree. Indeed, I think that if you want to group all pieces of music that are considered "classical music" the exclusive common element is exactly this: it's orchestrated music, or music that uses a subset of a symphonic orchestra (one or more instruments which belong to a symphonic orchestra).

Now, this doesn't mean that if you play punk music with an orchestra it's classical music. Of course not. But unless there are very valid arguments to say that an orchestrated piece is not classical music, then it is.
For example, I don't see very valid arguments to say that the music of Star Wars is not classical music, so it is.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

HansZimmer said:


> The problem is that, first of all, you have to define what is classical music.
> 
> Many persons say that classical music doesn't simply mean "orchestrated music", but I don't agree. Indeed, I think that if you want to group all pieces of music that are considered "classical music" the exclusive common element is exactly this: it's orchestrated music, or music that uses a subset of a symphonic orchestra (one or more instruments which belong to a symphonic orchestra).
> 
> ...


If we go by your definition of classical music then I would say it is not a very good piece and I have no intention of listening to it again. Definitely don't feel the same about Star Wars. I hope this answers your question


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> I don't understand your question. Nintendo creates music for the videogames and has a few composers who obviously get a salary like all other workers.
> Today, Nintendo uses often orchestras for the soundtracks like Hollywood. In old videogames they were not able to do so cause of tecnological limits, so the sounds were programmed inside the videogames and therefore videogames used to have that creepy 8-bit music.


Oh right, that's fine. It's just a piece of functional music for video games. People make it because it fits into that product spec, that's all. I expect it works very well in that context, for that target market. I don't see there's anything more to be said -- it is what it does.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Mandryka said:


> Oh right, that's fine. It's just a piece of functional music for video games. People make it because it fits into that product spec, that's all. I expect it works very well in that context, for that target market. I don't see there's anything more to be said -- it is what it does.


The music is created for videogames like film scores are created for films. However, John Williams, Hans Zimmer and James Horner are able to sell ticket for concerts.

If what you wanted to know is if Nintendo and videogame composers do concerts like the film scores composers, the answer is: yes.

Indeed, the first video in the OP is of a live concert of Nintendo.


----------



## Mandryka (Feb 22, 2013)

HansZimmer said:


> The music is created for videogames like film scores are created for films. However, John Williams, Hans Zimmer and James Horner are able to sell ticket for concerts.
> 
> If what you wanted to know is if Nintendo and videogame composers do concerts like the film scores composers, the answer is: yes.
> 
> Indeed, the first video in the OP is of a live concert of Nintendo.


So it's a piece of functional music, designed to make money, and it does so from two revenue streams - a primary stream from games and a secondary stream from concerts and maybe other merch. It's no different from the music written for an ad or commercially driven theatre or film. It is made to fit its niche, it's target audience. The financial aims and marketing plan come first in the thinking behind the music.

In the 19th century people used to call this sort of stuff _industrial art _, and I quite like that expression. K-pop, wallpaper, cabaret, music theatre, ceramics . . . NACM . . .


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Mandryka said:


> So it's a piece of functional music, designed to make money, and it does so from two revenue streams - a primary stream from games and a secondary stream from concerts and maybe other merch. It's no different from the music written for an ad or commercially driven theatre or film. It is made to fit its niche, it's target audience. The financial aims and marketing plan come first in the thinking behind the music.
> 
> In the 19th century people used to call this sort of stuff _industrial art _, and I quite like that expression. K-pop, wallpaper, cabaret, music theatre, ceramics . . . NACM . . .


It seems that you want to speak about economy.

Do you know what is a self-sustained service? It's a service which doesn't need money from the state because it's able to survive thanks to money of it's customers.

Why is a self-sustained service better than a service which needs the money of the state to survive? 
Because if a service is self-sustained, it means that it produces a real value for people, who freely choose to give their money for something that has a value for them.

A service which is not self-sustained has not the requirement to produce a value for people, because the state takes money with the force, so people pay taxes only because they don't want to go to jail.

That said, why do I feel that you have something against self-sustained composers?

I've read the complaints of some persons who studied music at the university and had the brain full of musical theory: they are against film scores composers because they are able to make money with music, and so they are self-sustained composers.
With their brain full of music theory they don't understand that being an artist doesn't mean to show to people that are able to use counterpoints and so on, but it simply means "give emotions to people".

The reality is that those persons who bash Hans Zimmer, John Williams, James Cameron, Thomas Newman, Alan Silvestri and so on are frustrated because they are not able to make art. If doing what Hans Zimmer does would be so easy, then everyone who studied composition at the university would be able to replace him... but the reality is that they are not able.

That said, would Beethoven be a self-sustained composer in liberal capitalism? I think yes. Why is Beethoven still remembered today? Because his music has a value for many people. It's not because he was able to use counterpoints.

Finally, remember that the difference between commercial music and film scores is that in commercial music the product is the artist, while in film scores that product it's the music.
That's why pop singers have to show **** and ***. Fortunately, Hans Zimmer doesn't have to show his ***** to women and homosexuals to make money, because the value is in his music.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

HansZimmer said:


> It seems that you want to speak about economy.
> 
> Do you know what is a self-sustained service? It's a service which doesn't need money from the state because it's able to survive thanks to money of it's customers.
> 
> ...


Ok but like what's your point? No one here thinks that this fire emblem music is extremely good or well written, and it hasn't brought most of us pleasure. Even if you identify it as classical music, it's not good classical music. Actually you said it yourself, people need to admit that there can be bad classical music and good pop music. Well, this is a great example! And judging by most of the reactions of this thread and by others about John Williams, Hans zimmer etc. people really like them and their scores, but just not this fire emblem one


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

HansZimmer said:


> It seems that you want to speak about economy.
> 
> Do you know what is a self-sustained service? It's a service which doesn't need money from the state because it's able to survive thanks to money of it's customers.
> 
> ...


I hope some of that diatribe isn't directed at me Hans. I studied academically and then went on to make a good sustained living writing media music and winning awards along the way, so I am proof that what you say above is way off the mark and not just regarding ignorance about music theory. Did you ever think that composers who learn theory extensively might not want to write like HZ et al because they want to explore their creativity using the more complex approaches they have mastered? Music has much more to offer than the fulfilling of a brief or conformity to cliches expected by paying clients.
I see this underlying prejudice against training all the time on the internet which is a shame because knowing a craft well can literally set expressive creativity free, not hamper it. Tell me Hans, do you own a DAW?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

mikeh375 said:


> I hope some of that diatribe isn't directed at me Hans. I studied academically and then went on to make a good sustained living writing media music and winning awards along the way, so I am proof that what you say above is way off the mark and not just regarding ignorance about music theory. Did you ever think that composers who learn theory extensively might not want to write like HZ et al because they want to explore their creativity using the more complex approaches they have mastered? Music has much more to offer than the fulfilling of a brief or conformity to cliches expected by paying clients.
> I see this underlying prejudice against training all the time on the internet which is a shame because knowing a craft well can literally set expressive creativity free, not hamper it. Tell me Hans, do you own a DAW?


Sorry, but why do you think that the post you quoted was directed at you? No, it was not.

However your last post contains the bias about which I was speaking.
If someone has a master degree in music doesn't mean that he is an artist and that he can replace Hans Zimmer.
Of course a person with a master degree in music can POTENTIALLY become an artist, but someone without a master degree could be a better artist than him.

The master degree of "artist" doesn't exist and will never exist. Art is not a university exam.

You call "cliché" the work of Hans Zimmer. It's like to say that Hans Zimmer doesn't know what is art and that people who like him don't know what it is. Don't you think that it's possible that Hans Zimmer is respected by many people because they feel that he is above the average, and not a "cliché"? 
If HZ would be a cliché everyone would be able to replace him.

Now I am speaking about economy and not about music. There is a rule in economy: if you get much money for your work, it means that it's difficult to replace you. Indeed, if everyone with a basic music knowledge could replace Hanz Zimmer, a film score would cost 2 dollars.
Try to explain why a film score doesn't cost 2 dollars.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

Hans, you need to read all my posts more carefully as they are nuanced to avoid misunderstandings like above.

There is no bias in my attitudes and I've already stated that untrained composers have written some of my favourite music. I have not even said HZ is cliched, quite the opposite (see last paragraph of post 35), as I too like some of his work - 'Gladiator' and ' Inception' are outstanding imv with the proviso that perhaps not all the music will have been written by him. The bias seen in our exchanges so far is all yours seemingly, against formal training which is the reason I asked if you owned a DAW as that attitude is a typical one.

I know precisely why and how film scores cost what they do and why talent is not the only reason for initial success in film, whereas you seem to be wearing rose tinted glasses in this regard.
As you didn't answer the question in my last post, I'll take it that you are a DAW owner. Can you read music?


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

HansZimmer said:


> .
> ... That's why pop singers have to show **** and ***. Fortunately, Hans Zimmer doesn't have to show his ***** *to women and homosexuals* to make money, because the value is in his music.


Did you really need to add the bolded part? I understand your point but that addition doesn't sit right with me. You could have made the same point without it!


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

mikeh375 said:


> The bias seen in our exchanges so far is all yours seemingly, against formal training which is the reason I asked if you owned a DAW as that attitude is a typical one.


No, I don't own a DAW and I have never written that I'm against formal training.

Indeed, I think that if someone has artistic values can improve his skills with university. If Hans Zimmer, for example, would take a master degree in composition he could learn new things that he can spend in his job. 
What I was saying is that music theory ALONE doesn't make you an artist and that complex melodies are not necessarily better than simple melodies.

I think that complexity means better quality when it comes to arrange (an orchestral arrangement, for example, is richer than a more simple arrangement), but it's not true that a melody sounds better if it is more complex.


----------



## Botschaft (Aug 4, 2017)

It’s whorible and it’s not classical music.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Merl said:


> Did you really need to add the bolded part? I understand your point but that addition doesn't sit right with me. You could have made the same point without it!


Why, is this offensive?

I was simply saying that in commercial music the product is the artist and not only the music.
Take for example Eminem: he has strong skills in his field, but the product is not only his music. The product is "a bad boy who can rap".
Sometimes the product is simply "a bad boy": there are other famous rappers that have weak skills, or pop singers that are not able to sing without the autotune.

Today, many rappers are simply "bad boys" and many pop singers are simply attractive women and men. Industrial music sells role models, not simply music.

I explained that because someone could ask why there are singers with a not so great musical talent who are famous, and the reply to this question is that the product is not only music. The singer, the lyrics, and many other things are the products. It's funny how many times you just have to sing vulgarities to succeed with bad boys or to sing trivial love songs to succeed with romantic people.

The most famous song of the italian singer Marco Masini is "Vaffanculo" (translated in english with "**** you"): in the lyric he described himself as someone who was treated as a looser but then he was able to succeed in music and he is now able to say "**** you" to all people who didn't believe in him.






Marco Masini is a skilled singer, but when you see that a vulgar song is more famous than his songs with more depth you understand how commercial music works.

When it comes to film scores composers the product is simply the music and therefore if you have success in this field of music it usually means that you have musical skills. Indeed, the music you write has neither lyrics, so you have to be able to talk with music.


----------



## KevinJS (Sep 24, 2021)

It's horrible. Sounds like the national anthem of a banana republic, played by musicians who are well aware that the bar is about to close and they need to get on with it if they don't want to miss last call. Maybe I should have listened to one of the instrumental versions?


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Botschaft said:


> It's whorible and it's not classical music.


Define "classical music".


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

KevinJS said:


> Maybe I should have listened to one of the instrumental versions?


Why not, you can try.


----------



## Red Terror (Dec 10, 2018)




----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

chipia said:


> People here call the music in the OP horrible because it's "melody-obsessive" or is not formally complex, but then again, alot of classical music, e.g. Mozart is also very melody-focused. And the piece actually has some chromatic twists, especially the outro, that I wouldn't necessarily call "predictable".
> 
> If this piece was revealed to be a fragment of a lost Mozart or Verdi Opera, I'm sure the poll would look very different.


To say that a piece of music is bad because it puts the accent in the melody is simply silly, but to be honest some people wrote they they don't like the melody. 
I don't know how many of those 19 users voted "horrible" only because it's a melodic piece, how many voted "horrible" because they don't like the melody and how many voted "horrible" only because it comes from a videogame.

However, I agree with you that the arrangement is well done. If someone says that the arranger has no technical skills, he/she lies.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

EvaBaron said:


> I just listened to it and it was a nice piece of music but I wouldn't define it as classical





EvaBaron said:


> Ok but like what's your point? No one here thinks that this fire emblem music is extremely good or well written, and it hasn't brought most of us pleasure. Even if you identify it as classical music, it's not good classical music. Actually you said it yourself, people need to admit that there can be bad classical music and good pop music. Well, this is a great example! And judging by most of the reactions of this thread and by others about John Williams, Hans zimmer etc. people really like them and their scores, but just not this fire emblem one


EvaBaron, your posts are a bit contradictory. Don't you think?


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

HansZimmer said:


> .............
> 
> I think that complexity means better quality when it comes to arrange (an orchestral arrangement, for example, is richer than a more simple arrangement),* but it's not true that a melody sounds better if it is more complex.*


Hans, that is a position based on taste alone. Simple melody has its place, certainly in film where music is mainly subservient to dialogue and FX but as a general statement about music and its efficacy, the bolded above is not a viable nor factual assertion. One might say that a simple melody is more direct and as a result may have more appeal but thats about it. There is great depth and beauty in complex music too.


----------



## EvaBaron (Jan 3, 2022)

HansZimmer said:


> EvaBaron, your posts are a bit contradictory. Don't you think?


Nope, as a piece of music it's nice, but if you define it as classical music, it's relatively bad classical music


----------



## Forster (Apr 22, 2021)

HansZimmer said:


> it's not true that a melody sounds better if it is more complex.





mikeh375 said:


> Hans, that is a position based on taste alone. Simple melody has its place, certainly in film where music is mainly subservient to dialogue and FX but as a general statement about music and its efficacy, the bolded above is not a viable nor factual assertion. One might say that a simple melody is more direct and as a result may have more appeal but thats about it. There is great depth and beauty in complex music too.


it might be more accurate to say either:

"it's not true that a melody *necessarily *sounds better if it is more complex"

Or:

"The beauty of a melody is not dependent on its complexity."


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

Forster said:


> it might be more accurate to say either:
> 
> "it's not true that a melody *necessarily *sounds better if it is more complex"
> 
> ...


Indeed it is what I was trying to say. I have never written that a complex melody sounds bad, but simply that you can't say "The melodies I compose are more complex than yours and so my music deserves more success".

Too many times I read things like "A more simple melody attracts a wider audience", but this is not true. 
A complex melody can also attract a large audience if it sounds good.

For example, this polyphony of Bach sounds good and I think that a such piece would be appreciated by a large audience, if classical music would be played in mainstream radios.






Now, if someone composes poliphonies and he doesn't have success he should ask himself why Bach had success while he has not, instead to bash composers who have success with writing homophonies saying that they have not talent and that they write music for stupid people who don't understand art.


----------



## HansZimmer (11 mo ago)

EvaBaron said:


> Mozart wasn't just melody focused, he also had a great understanding of counterpoint, harmony and a dozen other things that are the reason that he is regarded as one of the best composers of all time. Are you seriously, willingly, unashamedly, making this comparison?


What do you know about the knowledge of Yuka Tsujiyoho about music theory?
Just because you know counterpoints doesn't mean that you must and you want to use them.

To clarify, in the field of soundtrack music there is not the habit to write music with counterpoints and the goal is to write nice melodies which shake emotions.
This doesn't mean that the composer doesn't know other things of music theory.

Thomas Newman, for example, has a master degree in composition and the music he composes for films is technically similar to the music of this thread.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

HansZimmer said:


> Finally, there is art music, which contains "baroque music", "classical music", "romantic music", "modern music" and "contemporary music".


Those are "idioms". Jazz, rock, pop are "genres".


----------

