Can Nobuo Uematsu compete with the Classical greats?

[Rakim]

I read this Guardian article about Nobuo Uematsu earlier and it's got me thinking about game music and where it fits in the world of classical music.

The basic contents of the article are :

• Classic FM allows game music into their Hall of Fame.
• Nobuo Uematsu voted in to the top 10 three years straight by listeners.
• Is his music really worthy of this?

So is it? Are Nobuo Uematsu and similarly accomplished video game composers lightweights when compared to Tchaikovsky, Debussy and the like? Or are they fully deserving of a seat at the big boys table?


Here's one of his pieces that I like just for the hell of it:

phpBB [video]

[Zoltor]

I say definitely, especially with To Zanarkand from FF 10.

Infact I say he's even better then the classical greats, because all the classical music made back then, is composed of the most randomly put together notes, while something like To Zanarkand(along with all his songs actually, I'm just using to Zanarkand as a prime example, since It's as classical you can get, no big orchestras or anything, just one man, and a Piano)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iY9kDEaldog (or a 13 year girl in the case of this video lol talk about mad skills, she must be a savant or something. She even does the faster verse as well, she does the whole thing nearly flawlessly, the couple of mistakes she makes, aren't even during the hardest parts of the song, they're grace notes during the slowest parts of the song).

Sadly that's like the final song he created for a FF game, because Square made the dumbest decision ever(Square CEO: I know, to cut costs lets not use one of the greatest composers who ever lived, anymore. Me: Square, the people running the company, are complete morons)

Well anyway back to the topic, almost everything he composes is a masterpiece, so yea he, and his music definitely deserve such.

[Esppiral]

He will never get the recognition he deserves, just because most of his compositions are focused on the videogame industry, it is as sad as it sounds...

My fave compositions from him are To Zanarkand (FFX) A Return Indeed (LO) and most of the Blue Dragon Soundtrack.
He was my inspiration to start learning piano on my own, I did this ( A return indeed) cover some time ago, I love that song.

phpBB [video]

Shitty/old/ cheap keyboard sound, sorry xD

[Zoltor]

He will never get the recognition he deserves, just because most of his compositions are focused on the videogame industry, it is as sad as it sounds...

My fave compositions from him are To Zanarkand (FFX) A Return Indeed (LO) and most of the Blue Dragon Soundtrack.
He was my inspiration to start learning piano on my own, I did this ( A return indeed) cover some time ago, I love that song.

phpBB [video]

Shitty/old/ cheap keyboard sound, sorry xD

You know, I don't think history is going to see it like that though, because how the Inuyasha anime changed the Japanese music industry, It's very common for artists with like rock star status to make music for anime, and such is very excepted by the main stream music loving crowd, so I think in the long run, music in games will be taken more seriously by the mainstream music scene as well.

In the short term, that will sadly be the case though I'm sure sigh.

[south carmain]

I would say most people here are too biased to one side to be able to give an objective answer.

[Thief]

I believe there is a problem in thinking that an individual piece of music needs to be a part of any specific genre, or written for any particular reason, to be great. There are people who think that the only great music is that of classical and folk or something along those lines, but it's those particular people with whom I pity the most because they completely miss the point of why something is good or why something is "art" -- not because it exists as a certain "appropriate" way, but because it has allowed someone to experience something great.

Another problem is thinking that a particular piece of music needs to be objectively good based on the majority's opinion or because the music is part of some established "canon". Mozart is not necessarily good because millions of people believe his work to be good, or because he has influenced the work of many others after him, all it means when we talk of many people liking mozart is simply that... many people like mozart. We are all individually biased towards a preference in music -- and what stands the test of time is the collected bias's that happen to coincide with one another. Similar opinions from many individuals -- but that in and of itself does not make them necessarily right about the music itself. All it does is speak of popularity.

So if you were to ask me if I think that Nobuo Uematsu can ever compete with the classical "greats" in terms of popularity, I would respond "probably not".

First I would ask yourself if you even believe the "classical greats" (whoever they may be) to be great, and if you do, then I would ask you to consider if you believe Nobuo to be just as good or better. Whatever conclusion you came to, as long as it was your own conclusion, then I'd ask you to hold true to that belief until someone is able to convince you otherwise.

[OL]

It's an interesting question, and one that can be approached from a variety of angles. There's little in the way of anything factual that can be used to argue one side or the other. I think Thief said it well enough, that it doesn't really matter how an artist is considered by the masses, so long as their work touches you personally in some way.

That being said, I do have to mention that the criteria with which we generally measure the greatness of Uematsu's music is pretty different from the criteria that established the "greats" with their positions in the public mind. I think, more than anything else, Uematsu's music is so highly revered because it's catchy. Nothing wrong with that, obviously; the man has created some wonderful, affecting works, and nothing can detract from the legacy he's established. But it should be said that just because he creates primarily orchestral works, that doesn't necessarily place him in the "classical" genre. His works most often follow a sort of sing-song "verse-->chorus-->verse" formula. His work may usually share the same basic instruments that classical composers used, but his actual writing style is more akin to rock or pop radio stuff. Being primarily videogame-backing works that are intended to repeat in-game, it only makes sense that he writes that way.
Meanwhile, the majority of legitimate "classical" works tend to continually change as the piece goes on, rather than repeating earlier parts. Vivaldi's Winter Concerto, for example, keeps a steady rhythm but continually varies the tune as it moves, never quite revisiting the same place. It retains similarities throughout as a sort of "glue" holding it together, but on the whole it's nothing like the "verse-->chorus-->verse" formula I mentioned. I don't believe I've ever heard anything by Uematsu that's quite as technically-complex as that.
Of course, then you've also got legitimate classical works like Saint Saens' excellent Danse Macabre, which to some extent really does follow a similar pattern to Uematsu's stuff, repeating its main themes again and again. So it's not really a rule or anything.
Classical composers tend to get all lumped together in the public mind after a certain amount of time has passed though. People will freely mention Debussy and Mozart in the same breath, even though their works were over 100 years apart from each other. So I suppose the best thing to say on this subject would be... I'll get back to you in 100 years. It's only by that point that we'll be able to see if Uematsu ends up as highly regarded as the older "greats."

Just to contribute to the sound pool, I really like this track. Since it's not from a videogame, it may actually be the closest thing he has to something more along the lines of actual "classical," since, being movie score, it isn't particularly repetitious at all.

phpBB [video]

[shredingskin]

No, simply because the "greats" were a high-point in music history of their times/movements (and those movements were a/the whole way of thinking, it's music, literature, plastic art, arquitecture, etc.).

[Henry Spencer]

The older video game music "greats" as it were like Nobuo, Koji Kondo, Hitoshi Sakimoto, Yuzo Koshiro, Yoko Shimomura etc all started off working on compositions outside of the realms of "classical" music, instead creating music for 8-bit games, old Japanese PC games (such as the PC98) and Arcade cabinets. Whether you find that kind of music "artful" or not is really up to the individual, but considering how each of those composers had to work within the confines of their own space, I'd say each of them did very impressive work, but it's really hard to define such works as "art". The video game music transition from 16-bit to 32-bit/3D left some composers behind in the wind whilst others carried on to create such music that could be defined as (and actually mistaken for) "classical" music by some.
But I would argue that does his compositions an injustice. His work, like those aforementioned other composers, is primarily created using Synthesizers, keyboards and computer software. It's arguably a more organic process than just getting a group of others to play the music out in a studio, since all of the music is instead created by one guy - Nobuo, as opposed to a studio of many and the range of sounds created is also far greater. There are some music snobs out there that wouldn't class any music created using Synths, keyboards or computer software as being "on the same level" and I say to those people "fuck off".

Final Fantasy VII, VIII & IX - A wide variety of sounds, ranging from the electronic and industrial to the soft sounds of the orchestral. His sound cannot be "defined" one way or another, since the breadth of his work is so varied between each of these games. If you cannot define his music as "art", then it's hard to say what is, really. I don't really find myself as a big fan of Final Fantasy as a whole and certainly don't have any nostalgic attachment to these PSX Final Fantasy games like most others on here do, but there's no doubt in my mind that Uematsu's music is nothing short of being three masterpieces, that he never has trumped since. His music could defined as "art" just for the sheer amount of different musical styles his work covers in these three games, alone. The fact that so many people find the music so memorable is a triumph for him as a composer in itself. Most people who create music want their works to be remembered and considering how many works in the Video Game Music space often get "forgotten" despite how good some of them are, just speaks volumes about Uematsu's work.

Lost Odyssey - Probably his most underrated OST that deserves a second listen. I remember listening to it at the time of its release and thinking that he "phoned it in" compared to how great his works used to be, but honestly, it's one that's grown on me over the years. Full of lush, beautiful soundscapes and full of passion, that aims for the emotions rather than the cerebral. The only mishap is that the music is often more forgotten and less memorable than his earlier works.

The Last Story - Some good compositions that honestly seem pretty inspired by film scores of today (even a couple of tracks sound like they're from Metal Gear Solid 4 rather than from a fantasy RPG). Unfortunately, it's a rather weak album overall and I can't for the life of me remember a single track from this album until I look it up on YouTube. It's very different from Uematsu's previous works and it's a decent listen, just not one that I'd define as "great" like his previous works.

His work is kind of being defined by the times we live in now and he's rather sadly let the work of film scores dictate what sort of music he should create rather than do his "own thing" like he did during the 16-bit and 32-bit eras for Square, which was easily his high point. He defined the sort of game music sound that others would imitate, now he's kind of "imitating" film composers instead, which is sad. Back to the original question though, can his old works be defined as "art" I would say so considering how his music defined a level of creation, experimentation and breadth of work that was needed in that jump to 3D (which was new territory for him at the time) and very much succeeded in every way possible, how high you value that by itself as "art" is really up to you. Classical music created by the greats of old would probably give his work a listen and like it. We live in very different times now and the music work as such as evolved. Place somebody like Uematsu in that time period and he would feel so lost, same goes the other way. Although a man like Beethoven would probably be fascinated by the frequent use of synths as opposed to the old ways of composing. Catchy music in itself is "art" to me.

[AnimeGamer183]

composers like uematsu is the closest thing we will get to the classical greats, they are the modern versions and with their own style and composition to make their works their own and I believe they can all hold up against each other when you look at the raw music. You could argue the older guys are more significant because of their eras and the ground they broke during those time periods, but I think if you just look at the music by itself its a pretty level playing field as all these guys have done different things with different musical and mixing recording and composition techniques tools and technology of their given eras. All of the old and new greats of classical music have an argument as to why they can compete, plain and simple.

[shredingskin]

composers like uematsu is the closest thing we will get to the classical greats

Not really. Uematsu is closer to John WIlliams, Clint Mansell.

Even while we think of "classical music" it doesn't means all of those composers.
Commonly spoke:
(baroque)
Vivaldi: Incredible melodic work, great formalism in the concerto form, waved scales as seamless, upper meaning to forms to give their shit more meaning. Early romanticist in melodic form.
Bach: Master of baroque becasue after him polyphony was "mastered". The baroque was considered pompous for the classics, and it's understandable. It was a marking point, everyone trying the Fuge would be an "copycat" of bach.
(classics):
Mozart: he saw the amazing stuff done by Haydn in the meaning of formality, what the "theme" used to be he created upon it (giving vivaldi a stuff requiem), and giving those "dancing" walts and suites a pop dancing framework. He made both a requiem (religious anthem) as the magic flute (commoners opera, with a big deal of mason inspiration).
Beethoven: He did reflect of what a sypmphony meeeant

I don't give that much of a shit.

Betoven tried to keep bach, in grobe fugue, they didn't like it. He was the big stepping stone into romanticism, moonlight sonata.
There you go, more people stepped in more focusing on the beauty of the instrument in romanticism like lizst and chopin.
Debussy flowness can be called impresionism, specially since his compositions did tend to do some kinda staccato chords.
Wagner did some expresionism with his lei motivs, his grand operas and reallt strucking bass parts.
Schoenberg was a little bit of "every note has an equal pace in everything" marxist stuff.
Xenakis was an architect with some very interesting ideas about music, the made music of a lot of notes that would form something like a cloud (like any brownian function made in anything).
Stockhausen was a big deal on serialism and his formula with a lot of electronic experience.

So mostly that's it. Today we don't have movements, or we have a lot but are kinda stupid.

Big band. grunge, rock, metal, punk, EDM, pop, dance, post rock.

To me they all seem pretty damn the same, the last big thing we got were when those africans in north america saw those new instruments.