As for the rules of music that were established both by Bach and Beethoven, they can't really be diminished with a wave of the hand when they are literally the foundation of nearly all past and contemporary music. 99.9% of everything you listen to follows their rules very strictly. Music is an art, but SOUND does not follow the same psychological rules of art that other arts do. Some sounds are ugly, and this is not as much subjective as it is ingrained in our very genes. There is FAR less interpretation and leeway than in the visual arts. Good composition is essentially a math problem.
i know the director of a micro-tonal music festival that would disagree with you.
music, as we know it in the west (and indeed, as uematsu often composes it) follows and "lives by" different rules than it does elsewhere in the world. simple cultures (that is to say, ones that are largely still what could be called "tribal") often adopt the use of the pentatonic scale, omitting the rather dissonant 2nd and 7th notes in favor of a scale utilizing only the 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6th tones.
however, in western music, the 2nd and 7th notes create a great deal of musical tension, and such are used to drive the music we know and love. as you know, Dancing Mad uses this musical tension to great effect (for those wondering what i mean by "musical tension" listen to the second movement of Dancing Mad, where the organ starts to become especially dissonant in sound. that dissonance is intentional, and not only does it represent Kefka and his madness, but it also serves as a relentless engine in the song, driving it to its ultimate tonal resolution heard at the bridge between the third movement and the fourth movement). these 7th and 2nd notes are often incorporated into minor chord tonality, and indeed exist as the base of minor chords (again, for those without a musical background, you already know what a minor chord tonality sounds like....pretty much any song that is "dark" or "sad" utilizes some kind of minor chord in western music).
however, thats just western music. in eastern music, said minor chords and tones are not seen as being "sad" or "darker" than their companion major chords and tones, and as thus youll have songs written that are considered "pop" songs yet written almost entirely with a minor tonality in mind. contrast this to western music where anyone who has listened to enough music can anticipate the chord progression behind most pop songs (nearly all of which utilize the same basic major chord structure) and its easy to see how culture can influence what is and is not considered "good composition." the bottom line is, you cannot just reduce sound to a series of math problems. ask any musician that plays an untempered instrument (violin, fretless guitar) where they note "A" is, and their answer will be "well, it depends." this is because sound as we describe it in tones is ultimately based off of relative ratios that change depending on they key you are in.
in short, there are no hard and fast rules, and it does a disservice to say that musical sound can be broken down into simple math equations. yes, the mechanics of sound can be quantified as equations in and of themselves, but as you start adding complexity beyond a single tone, the ability to use math to express this sound as music drops off.
As for the rules of music that were established both by Bach and Beethoven, they can't really be diminished with a wave of the hand when they are literally the foundation of nearly all past and contemporary music. 99.9% of everything you listen to follows their rules very strictly.
you have to realize that bach and beethoven did not "establish" any rules of music per se. they just composed and played what sounded good. it was the music theorist who came after that began to try and quantify what they did into the "rules" of baroque music. but they were stymied because baroque music didnt really have any hard and fast rules....they were a lot like the pirates code....guidelines, really. a general set of things that should be done most of the time but ultimately what wins out is the question of whether or not what youre doing sounds good.
Being able to offer and receive criticism is crucial to professional development, and critical discussions of a professional's work are both a good exercise and, some would say, enjoyable. It's truly a shame how few people here seem able to appreciate what is critical to development. If you cannot question your own perceptions, loyalties and biases with a critical and objective eye, your growth is limited as a person. And the same is true if you cannot accept criticisms from and about others.
a noble goal, but youll have to forgive me if i call ******** on account of backpedaling. i can, for example, say to mikhalia, "youre an attention *****, get over yourself you insecure mealworm," but that doesnt really do much aside from make me look like an ***. instead, i could say something like "gosh mikhalia, you post a lot, but it seems to me a lot of your posts are just done for the sake of posting....maybe you could try saying something relevant or helpful to the thread at hand in every post you make, just so it looks like youre not just trying to +1 yourself as much as possible."
one is criticism. the other is basically me calling him a hack. one of those he can learn from, the other one just makes me look like a ****.
taken back into context, you came in here and you called uematsu a hack and a weak composer. this led a lot of us to believe you hadnt actually, you know, *heard* any of his music aside from what is currently in 14. it smelled very much like that fox TV news interview about Mass Effect a few years ago, where they interviewed these three "experts" for their opinions about this game they had never played.
"Well, I have absolutely no knowledge of what this subject is about, so let me tell you why it is wrong and terrible in every single way."
so heres my constructive criticism to you....try not to use the word "hack" when trying to constructively criticize someone or something.