Why Webber Sucks

Why Webber Doesn't Match Up

Ok, Webber dosn't just suck but he doesn't compare to someone

like Stephen Sondheim. The reason for this is that Sondheim writes

both lyrics and music where Webber just writes the music. Now

Webber writes decent music (even though he is prone to borrow

music sometimes from other people or recycle his own).

Sondheim has a real marriage between his music and lyrics which

give his characters a real depth of emotion that is hard to achieve

otherwise. Sondheim understands Psychology and can really bring

this out by custom working just the right emotion and mood.

Webber writes with various lyricists but I think the best is Tim

Rice (I understand they hate each other now). The best play by

Webber is "Jesus Christ Superstar" which is one of the Rice/Webber

collaborations. The music is good and the lyrics are awesome.

"Cats" is like this to a lesser degree. In that case the lyrics are by

T.S.Eliot (a poet) from "Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats".

As for the other Webber plays...I just don't care for them. I saw

"Phantom" on Broadway and it has a good book but a bad libretto. I

saw "Miss Saigon" the next night and it just blew "Phantom" to pieces

(that was the beginning of my fall from Webber).

Does Sondheim have bad plays? Yes. There are a couple of his

plays that I don't like as well but that is based on the book (story) of

the play and not the music or lyrics which is always good. Webber

has this same problem though (like "Starlight Express" for instance).

You can have the best musical core of a play but without a book to

illustrate the heart of the play it is only half a play. However, most of

Sondheim's plays are ok in this regard.

So, why does Webber seem to do so much better? That is

because Webber is easy to understand--he's the layman's composer.

His songs are simple and usually the musical melodic line follows

what the lead singer is doing (another example of a composer and

lyricist working apart). Sondheim's music is much more complex

which leads many to say that there is no melody to it. There is a

melody but you just have to find it and if you ever hear it recur it is

for a very good reason. The music really supports a Sondheim play

but it is used as a vehicle in a Webber play. You will often hear two

or three melodic lines at the same time in a Sondheim play but you

will rarely hear more than one in a Webber play.

Webber is like the Kenny G to broadway. Sondheim has so

substance to his plays but many don't or can't appreciated it until

they have heard it several times. This leads to very short Broadway

runs of most of Sondheim's shows. However, Sondheims's shows

are revived more than any other modern composer. This is because

Sondheim does much better after people have had a chance to

listen to the CD's and pick apart the complex score to appreciate it.

With Webber many of his plays have similarity in music or feel.

When a theatergoer walks into a Webber show he or she knows

what to expect. None of Sondheim's shows are like any of the

others and this is intentional. Sondheim once said that if his plays

started to sound alike he'd quit. This is another reason why a person

who liked "Into the Woods" will walk into "Sweeney Todd" and be

horrified (the two shows are completely dis-similar but are both

excellent).

Well, I've said my bit. Thanks for listening. You can go to two

Sondheim discussion groups if you want to hear more from people

who understand the intricacies of this master much more than I do.

A great place beginners is on Mark Bakalor's "finishing the chat"

web page where an ongoing discussion runs between fans. If you

want a deeper discussion (which tends to be more negative) then

you can subscribe to the mailing list. Make sure that in the body of

the message you type only: subscribe sondheim. To be fair you can

go to this page on Webber if you really want to.

Just my humble opinion. --Chris

Back to the Sondheim page (text version)

last updated: 4/5/97

Ok, Webber dosn't just suck but he doesn't compare to someone
like Stephen Sondheim. The reason for this is that Sondheim writes
both lyrics and music where Webber just writes the music. Now
Webber writes decent music (even though he is prone to borrow
music sometimes from other people or recycle his own).

Sondheim has a real marriage between his music and lyrics which
give his characters a real depth of emotion that is hard to achieve
otherwise. Sondheim understands Psychology and can really bring
this out by custom working just the right emotion and mood.

Webber writes with various lyricists but I think the best is Tim
Rice (I understand they hate each other now). The best play by
Webber is "Jesus Christ Superstar" which is one of the Rice/Webber
collaborations. The music is good and the lyrics are awesome.
"Cats" is like this to a lesser degree. In that case the lyrics are by
T.S.Eliot (a poet) from "Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats".
As for the other Webber plays...I just don't care for them. I saw
"Phantom" on Broadway and it has a good book but a bad libretto. I
saw "Miss Saigon" the next night and it just blew "Phantom" to pieces
(that was the beginning of my fall from Webber).

Does Sondheim have bad plays? Yes. There are a couple of his
plays that I don't like as well but that is based on the book (story) of
the play and not the music or lyrics which is always good. Webber
has this same problem though (like "Starlight Express" for instance).
You can have the best musical core of a play but without a book to
illustrate the heart of the play it is only half a play. However, most of
Sondheim's plays are ok in this regard.

So, why does Webber seem to do so much better? That is
because Webber is easy to understand--he's the layman's composer.
His songs are simple and usually the musical melodic line follows
what the lead singer is doing (another example of a composer and
lyricist working apart). Sondheim's music is much more complex
which leads many to say that there is no melody to it. There is a
melody but you just have to find it and if you ever hear it recur it is
for a very good reason. The music really supports a Sondheim play
but it is used as a vehicle in a Webber play. You will often hear two
or three melodic lines at the same time in a Sondheim play but you
will rarely hear more than one in a Webber play.

Webber is like the Kenny G to broadway. Sondheim has so
substance to his plays but many don't or can't appreciated it until
they have heard it several times. This leads to very short Broadway
runs of most of Sondheim's shows. However, Sondheims's shows
are revived more than any other modern composer. This is because
Sondheim does much better after people have had a chance to
listen to the CD's and pick apart the complex score to appreciate it.

With Webber many of his plays have similarity in music or feel.
When a theatergoer walks into a Webber show he or she knows
what to expect. None of Sondheim's shows are like any of the
others and this is intentional. Sondheim once said that if his plays
started to sound alike he'd quit. This is another reason why a person
who liked "Into the Woods" will walk into "Sweeney Todd" and be
horrified (the two shows are completely dis-similar but are both
excellent).

Well, I've said my bit. Thanks for listening. You can go to two
Sondheim discussion groups if you want to hear more from people
who understand the intricacies of this master much more than I do.
A great place beginners is on Mark Bakalor's "finishing the chat"
web page where an ongoing discussion runs between fans. If you
want a deeper discussion (which tends to be more negative) then
you can subscribe to the mailing list. Make sure that in the body of
the message you type only: subscribe sondheim. To be fair you can
go to this page on Webber if you really want to.

Just my humble opinion. --Chris