ErstQuake 2: Sept 23-25, NYC

[letchhausen]

just for the record, ryan, I still believe that any fault I may have perceived in the Rowe/Ottavi set would be completely nullified
had Julien included a snippet from "Caribbean Queen".

I would of liked it better if Ottavi had busted out singing Mountain's "Mississippi Queen".......

[diederich]

http://stylusmagazine.com/feature.php?ID=1889" onclick= "window.open(this.href);return false;

Didn't see this posted yet, a nice write up by our rarely seen undo, a.ka.a joe panzner.

[hatta]

I just finished reading that - nicely done Joe. I particularly enjoyed the write-up on the roundtable as no one else has tackled it and I thought his description was more coherent then mine.

[dolzenko]

Great photos. Thanks

[hatta]

The second "official" ErstQuake review, this time by occasional IHM "punter" Alastair, has been post on Paris Transatlantic (a day early even). Good work Alastair!

[Alastair]

Thanks Robert. Given the lack of a "comments" feature at PT I'm happy to take any criticism, either here or at "the other place", especially from those who were there. That way I learn.

[Richard Pinnell]

Are you happy to take praise as well?

Nice piece Al, thats two efforts that make my hideously delayed and probably not worth waiting for effort look pitiful in comparison so far.

See you tomorrow

[sevenarts]

very nice review al, brought back some good memories. i would point out that i disagree w/ your perception of the korber/barnes set, i really loved that one. i thought tomas was a very tough improviser to figure out all weekend, in terms of seperating what he was doing from his collaborators, but i didn't perceive at all that barnes was ignoring him.

totally agreed about the unami/meehan/nakamura set, though. i think we're in the minority there -- although, oddly enough, a lot of the people who did enjoy that set were the ones, like us, close enough to see what unami was doing.

also, i thought this was really interesting:

The following day Rowe explained to Chris Letcher that this final set had been an art piece, an expression of his disgust with America, and not meant as music at all. (His pre-set preparation presumably included finding radio stations that were talking specifically about Katrina.)

if that is indeed how rowe would characterize that set, it seems like a pretty radical departure. there's certainly political content in his erstlive duo with burkhard beins, not to mention in AMM's history, but i always thought of him as a musician who thought primarily in terms of sound. it surprises me that he'd intentionally prepare a set like that with the focus on politics to the detriment of the sound. but then, it may also explain why i didn't find that set very engaging as a purely aural experience.

[user_265]

nice one? well, i won't even comment on what you had to say about some of the other sets. as for my own sets, let me correct some... uh... "assumptions" you made:

1) korber/rowe: the "drones" you thought you were hearing keith play in the first half of our duo where, in fact, in the most part from his "younger contributor"... so this sentence: "With his characteristic drones and irruptions, Rowe started out as much the dominant partner." was in fact rather the opposite. though i'd say, none of us was dominant, it was pretty much even. (or go ask keith.)

2) korber/ottavi: "After some twenty minutes the noise abated allowing us to hear what Korber had been contributing – pretty interesting drones, as it happened" ... hmm... now that's really interesting, cause it happens that *I* didn't hear any of my contribution at all (except for the metallic crackling at the very end and some blurry feedback here and there.)

3) barnes/korber: FWIW, your review is pretty much the opposite of what most people thought about that set, but hey, after points 1 + 2, this is not really surprising, is it?

i recommend you focus on listening closer next time instead of making weird assumptions about who plays what. and go read this for a balanced review: http://stylusmagazine.com/feature.php?ID=1889" onclick= "window.open(this.href);return false;

[user_265]

i thought about what i wrote yesterday: scratch point 3 - it is your right to think something sucked, of course, i'm fine with that. "de gustibus non est disputandum".

i just think you should be careful when presenting your assumptions as "facts" to people who weren't there. your review is full of that (see points 1 and 2 of my other post) and that's just misleading.

i heard this was your first "public" review. personally i think it's not a good one. but compared to my first concert it is still a masterpiece, so don't worry...

[Alastair]

Thanks for the kind words, Richard and Phil (?).

Tomas, I'm sorry you didn't like my review. I regret that I had not heard any of your records before attending ErstQuake: if I had, perhaps I would have had a better handle on what you were doing. What I wrote was based on my own thoughts and notes plus long hours discussing the music with fellow listeners and some of the musicians after each of the shows and I wasn't aware that I was so off-beam in my assumptions that you challenge below. Perhaps I should have spoken to you as well.

I mentioned at Bagatellen a while ago that I worry that reviews of eai (or whatever we're calling it) sometimes concentrate too much on what it was that people did rather than the sound of the music, as (if) we're writing for people who know little of the music, rather than keen listeners or the musicians themselves (who are also keen listeners of course). I also said at the discussion forum on the Saturday (didn't see you there) that I find it difficult to put into words my feelings about this type of music, despite being a relatively articulate chap. The review was an attempt to give people who weren't there a feeling of what it was like to be there. I've emailed a link to the article to a few of my friends (some of them music writers) who don't frequent these boards to see whether it achieved its aims. Phil saying that it "bought back some good memories" showed that it can have other effects too, so if it fails in its primary aim at least I have that to comfort me.

Just to correct a misapprehension, it's not my first piece of public (music) writing, just my first for a long while. It is my first on this type of music though, unless you count a longish overview of the first 30 Erstwhile releases that I did on Jazz Corner a couple of years ago.

You didn't like the first piece of my writing that you read: I didn't enjoy my first exposure to your music. There's plenty of time and (I'm sure) a couple of open minds to ensure that in the future we'll be happy with what we read and hear from each other. Onward and upward!

[sevenarts]

Phil (?).

ed?


tomas, to be fair to al, i've heard a lot of your music and i still found it rather difficult to pick out what you were doing in these sets, though i enjoyed the ones with rowe and barnes a lot. it was obvious to me that you were doing something, just not always easy to separate it from the other musician. i think it's that your gestures are very subtle and restrained, and in this music it's not always easy to link a musician with his sounds in the absence of visual referents -- so i could pick out the feedback at the beginning of the rowe set and the aluminum foil at the end of the ottavi one, and not much else. which is not a bad thing at all, i love when improv musicians blend into each other to the point that their sounds are inseperable, and at least for me (and others i talked to) that happened to a great extent in your better 2 sets that weekend. but i probably wouldn't have hazarded the guesses al did in that review, for just that reason.

[user_265]

tomas, to be fair to al, i've heard a lot of your music and i still found it rather difficult to pick out what you were doing in these sets, though i enjoyed the ones with rowe and barnes a lot. it was obvious to me that you were doing something, just not always easy to separate it from the other musician. i think it's that your gestures are very subtle and restrained, and in this music it's not always easy to link a musician with his sounds in the absence of visual referents -- so i could pick out the feedback at the beginning of the rowe set and the aluminum foil at the end of the ottavi one, and not much else. which is not a bad thing at all, i love when improv musicians blend into each other to the point that their sounds are inseperable, and at least for me (and others i talked to) that happened to a great extent in your better 2 sets that weekend. but i probably wouldn't have hazarded the guesses al did in that review, for just that reason.

ed - just to be clear: i didn't mean that i expected al or you or anyone to pick out what i was doing. i know it is difficult. but that's exactly the reason why i think one should be careful making ANY assumptions of who is doing what. al's review of keith and my set, for example, is full of guesses that are disguised as facts. to me it sounds very much like: "oh, well i'm familiar with keith's music and i don't know what the other guy is playing, so i'll just guess keith is playing the dominant role here". that's just too easy and it also has a pretentious touch ("i totally got what was going on"). at least, that's the impression it had on me. i think joe's review on stylus is a good example of how to describe the music in a fair way (fair towards the musicians involved).

[Alastair]

Phil (?).

ed?

D'oh!

Perhaps we should all use our real names.

[sevenarts]

but that's exactly the reason why i think one should be careful making ANY assumptions of who is doing what. al's review of keith and my set, for example, is full of guesses that are disguised as facts.

yea, agreed. i've only learned that particular lesson from making that kind of mistake several times in my own reviews and having it pointed out to me.

[grisha]

al,

i thought your review was quite nice, and i wonder how i would feel about if i wasn't there. however, as for one who actually was there, i didn't feel like (unlike Joe's) it offered much insight (except for the Rowe/Ottavi bit - that was one of my favourite sets of the fest btw) and interesting perspective that would make it much more a rewarding read for me. despite the fact that you probably worked on it quite a bit, it also seemed hurried. it read like a hurried review to me. i think in one month more in-depth reflection on the music could be offered. however, i can't claim that i would do a better job myself, as i see you managed to put your thoughts on the nmperign set better than i did (i felt the same way about it). and the last four sentences were really great.

[grisha]

bump

for those who don't know yet. Ottavi/Workman's set from EQ is available here:

http://www.ruccas.org/index.php?Dion%20Workman" onclick= "window.open(this.href);return false;

[grisha]

http://www.bagatellen.com/archives/features/001049.html" onclick= "window.open(this.href);return false;

[p_ano]

(homo036) tim barnes + tomas korber - second day, third set