Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Jun 21, 2013 - 1:43 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

The original is obscure. (You can see it via Google Books -- page 38.) The author seems to draw a contrast between "iconographic compositions" and "generic" music. My guess is that the former means selections by known composers and the latter means anonymous bits. Ideally you should check this with the author, for his wording is simply not clear.

In my opinion, and with the way of jskoda's saying:

"iconographic compositions" means "iconic images", and means "particular scenes"

We can found in the cue sheets of Frankenstein the book list that when the monster appears, they will use "Dramatic—“Der Freischütz”, when Frankenstein or the girl enters, they will use "moderato” or “agitato” music.

So I think author want to express that the use of the music is just like a music theme nowadays to describe the particular roles and the particular scenes.

Am I right?

 
 
 Posted:   Jun 21, 2013 - 6:56 AM   
 By:   Rozsaphile   (Member)

Amazon's sample feature lets you see the entire passage:

http://www.amazon.com/Film-Music-History-James-Wierzbicki/dp/0415991994#reader_0415991994

The meaning is what I guessed: "a mix of familiar compositions with music . . . of a generic sort." In other words, the score combines familiar classical and popular selections with anonymous bits. The author has simply misused the word "iconographic."

 
 Posted:   Jun 21, 2013 - 7:41 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

Amazon's sample feature lets you see the entire passage:

http://www.amazon.com/Film-Music-History-James-Wierzbicki/dp/0415991994#reader_0415991994

The meaning is what I guessed: "a mix of familiar compositions with music . . . of a generic sort." In other words, the score combines familiar classical and popular selections with anonymous bits. The author has simply misused the word "iconographic."


In a way, your statement is make sense. I'll try to ask the author after the press get his email for me. frown

 
 Posted:   Jun 21, 2013 - 7:41 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

Amazon's sample feature lets you see the entire passage:

http://www.amazon.com/Film-Music-History-James-Wierzbicki/dp/0415991994#reader_0415991994

The meaning is what I guessed: "a mix of familiar compositions with music . . . of a generic sort." In other words, the score combines familiar classical and popular selections with anonymous bits. The author has simply misused the word "iconographic."


In a way, your statement is make sense. I'll try to ask the author after the press get his email for me. frown

 
 Posted:   Aug 9, 2013 - 8:28 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

Part 11, p 209

Involving reproduction equipment that was relatively inexpensive for exhibitors to license and install, Dolby Stereo soon enough became the norm for market-oriented filmmakers. Its spread was not so endemic as had been that of the Western Electric amplification system that initiated the era of the sound film. With no alternatives except to continue showing silent films, all theater owners who wanted to remain in business in the 1927-30 period were in effect compelled to adopt the Western Electric system.

In the bold sentence, I'm not clear about the logical relationship.

My understanding is

In 1927~1930, the owers had to use Western Electric system for keeping their business. but why it says "no alternatives except to continue showing silent films"? "no alternatives except to continue showing silent films" is happened in the period before 1927~30?

Thank you.

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 9, 2013 - 10:03 AM   
 By:   Rozsaphile   (Member)

The Western Electric system was the only one available to show the sound films that Hollywood was producing. The audience wanted sound films. If you could not show sound films, you could only show silents. If you could only show silents, you would lose business.

 
 Posted:   Aug 9, 2013 - 10:22 PM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

The Western Electric system was the only one available to show the sound films that Hollywood was producing. The audience wanted sound films. If you could not show sound films, you could only show silents. If you could only show silents, you would lose business.

Thank you so much, I got it.
Actually, it can be explained as
"All theater owners who wanted to remain in business in the 1927-30 period were in effect compelled to adopt the Western Electric system, or no alternatives except to continue showing silent films."

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 10, 2013 - 1:35 AM   
 By:   manderley   (Member)

.....Involving reproduction equipment that was relatively inexpensive for exhibitors to license and install, Dolby Stereo soon enough became the norm for market-oriented filmmakers. Its spread was not so endemic as had been that of the Western Electric amplification system that initiated the era of the sound film. With no alternatives except to continue showing silent films, all theater owners who wanted to remain in business in the 1927-30 period were in effect compelled to adopt the Western Electric system.....


Harrybocai......

The KEY word in this paragraph is "amplification"!

In the 1927-1931 period there were four major studio recording systems in place at various studios: RCA Photophone, a "a variable-area" sound-on-film system, Warner Bros. Vitaphone sound-on-disc system (co-partnered with Western Electric), Lee DeForest's Phonofilm, a "variable-density" sound-on-film system, and Fox-Case's Movietone, another "variable-density" sound-on-film system. Addtionally, there was the Tobis-Klangfilm sound-on-film system based on the Tri-Ergon patents, in Europe.

Though in competition with RCA, what Western Electric managed to do, through its "Electrical Research Products, Inc" / "ERPI" sales subsidiary, was sign nearly all of the major studios to providing Western Electric Sound Systems in their theatres (supplying sound-pickups at the film projector point, sound amplifiers, general electrical sound accessories, and, primarily, the massive behind-the-screen speaker assemblies.)

So.....this Western Electric monopoly (at least for awhile) was in the exhibition end of the business. Remember that most of the studios also had huge numbers of theatres they owned in chains/circuits across the country. If Western Electric simply supplied those during this demanding time, they would be very busy. The small town independent exhibitor was on his own. He might go with Western Electric or RCA or other, lesser, suppliers, or continue with silents or go out of business. In some cases, the small town exhibitor was not hampered by which sound supplier he used, he was primarily hampered by the cost of installing this equipment in his small theatre at all. Many went out of business, just as many went out of business in the CinemaScope days of the 1950s when the cost for re-equipping with new lenses, wide screens (and sometimes auditorium reconfiguration) and sound systems, could reach $25,000. Where he couldn't pay the tab, he eventually closed up shop.

 
 
 Posted:   Aug 10, 2013 - 7:20 AM   
 By:   Rozsaphile   (Member)

Great stuff, Manderley, though perhaps overwhelming for our Chinese translator!

Once again today we are seeing small theaters driven to close because they cannot afford the transition to digital projection. I gather that the conversion is just about complete for mainstream houses and chains. Even New York's leading revival house, the Film Forum, seems to screen digital images most of the time. Their publicity often touts newly restored prints, but you will often see "DCP" in tiny parentheses.

 
 Posted:   Sep 5, 2013 - 4:54 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

Harrybocai......

The KEY word in this paragraph is "amplification"!


You really amazed me smile
Your explanation make me know more about the history of the system.
I can't express my thought completely in English, just say thank you again.

 
 Posted:   Sep 5, 2013 - 5:00 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

My new problem is here.

The book quote STEPHEN HOLDEN's article How Rock Is Changing Hollywood's Tune.
http://www.nytimes.com/1989/07/16/movies/how-rock-is-changing-hollywood-s-tune.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Especially in the late 1960's, when a generation of performers lacking academic musical credentials began invading Hollywood sound studios, the field of movie music became embattled. The soundtracks for 'The Graduate' (1967) with songs by Simon and Garfunkel, and 'Easy Rider' (1969), the first major movie hit with a multi-artist rock compilation, brought the generation gap to Hollywood movie music, just as the films did to the screen.

the last sentence brought the generation gap to Hollywood movie music, just as the films did to the screen.

Can anyone help me explain what's the generation gap between film and music, or film and TV? frown

 
 
 Posted:   Sep 5, 2013 - 7:52 PM   
 By:   Rozsaphile   (Member)

"Generation gap" refers to the cultural divide between youth (the "baby boom" generation) and older, more traditional adults. Some of the sixties movies abandoned tradition and appealed overtly to young audiences. In film scoring, pop songs often replaced traditional scores by trained composers.

 
 Posted:   Sep 7, 2013 - 6:19 AM   
 By:   Harrybocai   (Member)

"Generation gap" refers to the cultural divide between youth (the "baby boom" generation) and older, more traditional adults. Some of the sixties movies abandoned tradition and appealed overtly to young audiences. In film scoring, pop songs often replaced traditional scores by trained composers.

Understand it, thank you for always helping me when I met problem. smile

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.