[Nick Zwar]

Not as a whole, but tracks such as “L’uomo dell’armonica” or “Journey to the Line” are special compositions for special circumstances in the films. Most of it is not like that.

On the contrary, I would argue that most film score tracks are special compositions for special circumstances in film. That’s just why film music is written in the first place. For special circumstances, scenes, events, happenings, etc. in the film. Why else would there be film music.

Most of the tracks are not self-sufficient pieces like that.

Not quite sure what “self-sufficient” means here. I take it to mean stand without musical or filmic context. Ok, let’s go with that.
Now, I would say all of the tracks composed for ONCE UPON A TIME IN THE WEST, really all of them, can stand alone and without any context just as music. But when is a track “self-sufficient”? As noted recently, there is a 2 second track in Mozart’s ZAUBERFLÖTE… is that a self-sufficient track, or does it need context? I have a recording of Mahler’s 7 th symphony that has 21 tracks… are any of them “self sufficient” or do they belong in a context?

Generally, I think music must be self sufficient to be interesting to listen to. So obviously all film music I personally have in my collection, that I use as examples, that I talk about, that I refer to, I consider as “self-sufficient”… why else would I bother with it. That means all film music in my collection can stand alone as music. But that doesn’t mean every single track makes sense without the preceding or following tracks… but that’s the same in many non-film music works. Longer works tend to have many musical segments that are not “self-sufficient” in that they alone by themselves have no real “beginning” or “ending”, so of course they are only self-sufficent in musical context. That’s not film music specific.

But before I answer your question about film music, let me start by saying that I try to be as precise and clear as I can be. That does not mean all of what I say is always precise and clear, but at least I strive for it.
So before I answer, let me restate, as I have up there, that I find most film music is “unimportant” as pure music. It is mostly secondary to the images or story, a lot of it is clichéd and in many ways musically “banal”. That is the status quo “as is”, and I don’t disagree with that, nor have I objected to that.

That means, automatically and by default obviously, that the film music I am interested in is automatically “exceptional”, different from the rule.
Then, secondly and also importantly, as I have repeatedly said, I am not questioning certain tendencies in film music. Film music tends to have shorter, less developed cues than classical music, film music tends to be emotionally more direct, etc. I am not and have not denied these tendencies, I have merely pointed out, and that is for me an important distinction, that these are a) tendencies and b) nothing that sets film music per se musically apart from non-film music, because you can find all these elements in non-film music and vice versa. That is and has been my point all this time.

Because of this, I reject the notion that “most film music tracks in all of history constitute examples”, when my contention was and is explicitly not that certain characteristics may be more frequently found or pronounced in film music, my objection was and is that these characteristics are in any way exclusive or specific to film music. That is a big difference. So you can’t say “most film music tracks constitute examples”, because “most film music tracks” cannot serve as the specific objections I have. “Most film music tracks” can serve to demonstrate a pattern, a tendency in film music, as I noted in a post up there, “a statistical count of frequency and not suitable to actually distinguish one piece of music from another”. So I don’t deny the “pattern”. I am denying that the pattern leads to a musical distinction. It is a contextual distinction, that certain musical tropes may be more frequently used or applied in film music, and I tried to show and demonstrate that very point. Therefore “most film music tracks” cannot serve as an example, as I did not try to show or prove that “most film music tracks” fit or do not fit into any particular pattern or that these patterns do not exist. I went from the pattern, which I acknowledge, to the specific, to make it disappear. I did that in order to demonstrate that the perceived pattern in film music is contextual, not musical, that it is statistical and not specif. Hence, by that very nature, “most tracks” can at best prove my point, not yours.

So, now to your specific question, which I think is a good question, I certainly enjoy this conversation.

It’s great that you recognize film music as its own artform, but if you don’t think there’s anything – any characteristics whatsoever – that separates it from other kinds of music, I do wonder what properties you think this artform is based on?

I do think there are lots of characteristics that are very specific to film music, which is why I think it is an art form to itself. However, once again, I do think that the characteristics and specifics to film music are contextual, not musical.
A film score is a music score written for a movie. It is composed to illuminate, enhance, support, embrace, strengthen, etc. the story, the action, the scenes and moods of the movie. For this, the film composer has all of the musical devices at his or her disposal that any other composer has at his or her disposal as well.

Nevertheless, you will find some musical devices and patterns more frequently applied and used than others, I’m not saying that ain’t so. I am and have just repeatedly said that these are statistical patterns, not clear-cut musical distinctions.

So the art of a film composer is to compose music that supports the film. That in itself does not give a film score a particular quality, that does not set film music apart from any other type of music, and I have shown plenty of examples to prove my point and could show many more. However, I acknowledge and have not denied that may nevertheless lead to commonalities of musical devices statistically particularly favored and presented in film music. It obviously is so. I am just saying that you cannot extrapolate direct musical relevance or peculiarities of any specific individual film score from that. Film music, just like ballet music, opera music, or any other type of music, is music first, and follows musical principalities first, and as such, is not inherently distinct or different from any other type of music. The properties of the artform are based on extra musical conditions the composer has to take into consideration, not on anything that distinguishes film music per se from any other type of music.