[Schilkeman]

I’m always a little (not completely) wary of “interpretation” with music. Music has a limited ability to convey concrete meaning without imposition from words or pictures. Unless a composer has stated “this is what I meant,” thus proving my point, what it means to the listener (and what are liner notes writers but listeners?) is a little too subjective for epexegesis.

Film music is, essentially, commentary, and it’s worth exploring the commentary in the liner notes. For me, I would love a more learned musical analysis. As I’ve said elsewhere, the stuff John Williams does between his themes is often more impressive than the themes themselves, and good liner notes could help illustrate this, and make for more careful listeners, rather than calling out every statement of a theme, and what it represents.

[Nicolai P. Zwar]

Any liner notes that offer some insight I didn’t have before and make me learn something are certainly welcomed, not matter what they are. First and foremost, that includes background information about the project (in film music that’s obviously film, but it can also be background information about a particular symphony, concerto, opera, or ballet.

Interpretation and musical analysis, by all means, yes, but with caution, and when it really adds something. As Schilkeman points out, what music “means” is up to the listener, and it should be. Not every film score requires erudite musical “analysis” — most probably don’t — or “interpretation” (because it’s often obvious what the music does and how it does it). Just pick out two famous examples, John Williams’ JAWS or John Carpenter’s HALLOWEEN. The later music is very simply, a keyboard driven ostinato figure, and the former, while undoubtedly one of the most important and best film scores of all time (in my humble opinion), is also pretty straight forward. It’s obvious what the music does in JAWS and equally obvious how it accomplishes it. Now sure, you may inject and spotlight a particular interesting compositional technique, or point to cross reference of motives and themes that may not be immediately obvious, but that is what I often see done in liner notes. Sure, some are better than others, some are more in depth than others, but not all film scores demand equal analysis.

I do have some of the printed film scores that have been published in recent years, not, because I’m such a terrific sight reader, but because I wanted to see — on page — how some of the music is notated… (I always wondered how Goldsmith notated some of the synths and especially the “blaster beam”), so that’s very interesting, but I don’t expect liner notes to include a full version of the printed score. But theses scores certainly offer more of a detailed behind the curtain” look at the nuts and bolts of a particular score than liner notes could hope to give.

[Thor Joachim Haga]

Kinda scary that I’ve already ripped off the shrinkwrap of several CDs in my collection walkthrough project, but not yet read any liner notes. That’s disconcerting. But I’ve had trouble concentrating on reading words-on-paper this last year, due to the tinnitus. But I was also struck by the absence of proper liner notes and booklets in many cases — just pictures, like in the olden Varese days, maybe a blurb from the director if we’re lucky (RISE OF SKYWALKER and DIAL OF DESTINY, for example).

[Nicolai P. Zwar]

Liner notes for soundtrack CDs are a bit like the supplemental bonus material on Blu-ray releases. If it’s a (more or less) concurrent release, extras/liner notes/booklets are seldom more then a few flattering promotional notes, if it’s an archival restored release of a classic film (or film score), you often get in depth notes, enlightening making-ofs, etc.

[Malte Müller]

Nice to see one of my first (and few) topics still alive 😉 Still have CDs laying around for years I haven’t read the liner notes at all…

[Author]

Posts