is EAI noise?

[jon abbey]

are you kidding?

No.

I take Cor's point about group interactivity but dont think there's anything being done now that constitutes a more developed or mature approach to the interaction of acoustic instrument and electronics than that of Tudor, Mumma, Behrman, Austin, Cage, Driscoll etc. much of which although yes, came from "one brain" did necessitate "making quick decisions on the spot" due to the unpredictability of the electronics.

alrighty then. this is a position so foreign to my way of thinking/worldview that I'm not even going to attempt to begin arguing with it.

[eklkrl]

Wait, so someone is suggesting that there wasn't appreciable change or development in the way that musicians approached the interaction between electronics and acoustic elements in improvised music in between the 1960s and the 1990s??? I guess I'm with Jon on this one, because that seems patently absurd on the face of it.

-Ernst

[Jesse]

It's self-evident, if you do a comparative listen to, say, Rain Forest and The Hands Of Caravaggio that little has changed.

[Richard Pinnell]

Where was I when someone handed out the mind altering drugs to half of the IHM posting fraternity this last week?

[snailed]

i haven't read through this whole thread, but just on the last point: besides computers, you're probably right that there haven't been as many revolutionary changes in techniques and approaches to electronic music in the past 20-30 odd years. but i think the major changes have been in a refinement of the actual music. this is due to artists being able to stand on the shoulders of those that came before - not having to be the ones inventing, but using the tools and techniques of the first generation to make a more coherent, elegant music - and not having to only be in a major academic institution to do it. the invention of the home computer has certainly helped this, and i think this is the major technical / approach change of the past 20 years has helped this refinement, along with widespread availability of the technology. but i think the music speaks for itself, if you listen to something great from the past few years vs. a classic piece of electronic music, maybe there isn't as much new in the way of technique, but there seems to be a major aesthetic refinement that has gone on.

[howsthatsound]

is the argument here, that EAI is objectively better than avant garde/early electronic music, or that it is different?

[mudd]

i don't see any value being attached, apart from maybe that 'maturation' is a good thing. which is hardly true as a blanket statement.

m

[Jesse]

is the argument here, that EAI is objectively better than avant garde/early electronic music?

This isn't an "argument", it's a matter tastes and preferences.
What is objectivity in matters of taste?
The linkage Snailed provided between antecedents and subsequent developments/branches is a pretty cool headed analysis.
This Cage match between the post-Darmstadts and the Onkyo/Reductionists is as concocted an affair as the WWF.

[snailed]

is the argument here, that EAI is objectively better than avant garde/early electronic music, or that it is different?

no, just that (for me) its value is not in inventing completely new techniques and methods of making music, but rather in refining those approaches which were new in early electronic music, making technical advances when needed for the sake of the music, and coming up with a different music and aesthetic altogether, which you may or may not like more depending on your taste (and of course on the particular piece).

or yeah, what jesse or mudd said. Cage match? pun?

[jon abbey]

is the argument here, that EAI is objectively better than avant garde/early electronic music, or that it is different?

the argument we've been having is that it's different, but for me, there's no comparison in terms of the quality of the music (with a small handful of exceptions).

in 2000, I did an eight hour DJ set in the Experimental Intermedia festival, which included pieces from both areas, and it was very hard to find many classical electronic pieces that could hold their own in the midst of the EAI pieces (Stockhausen-Telemusik, Xenakis-Legende d'Eer, Ashley-Automatic Writing, a few others).

also, just before I released The Room, to satisfy my own curiosity, I played Variations II and The Room back to back, and to my ears, it wasn't even close (I doubt even Keith would agree on this, but that's my perspective).

obviously in one way it's kind of silly to compare head to head like that, as EAI might not exist without the early groundbreaking classical electroacoustic work, but in another way, it's interesting to see how it holds up when compared purely musically in 2008, and for me, it mostly doesn't.

[gohleekwang]

just to said thank you for bring this label "Alga Marghen" up, i will dig more from them when i visit Staatplaat.

[jpeatt]

just to said thank you for bring this label "Alga Marghen" up, i will dig more from them when i visit Staatplaat.

Creel Pone is another good archival 'label', if you're looking. Staaplaat might stock them, but otherwise try mimaroglu

http://www.mimaroglumusicsales.com/labe ... +pone.html" onclick= "window.open(this.href);return false;

[Stephen]

I'm certainly not trying to make comparative value/qualitative judgements. I was thinking in terms of the methodologies used in the acoustic/electronic relationship. I am suspicious of the opinion that the technology has got "better and better", although granted computation does now enable more complex processing to happen faster and in a smaller device, seeing this as necessarily 'better' is problematic for me - it just seems to submit to the technocratic dogmas of the industry without any consideration.

The reason I mention Tudor, Mumma, Behrman.. and not INA GRM is that they were using their electronics in real-time improvised dialogue with acoustic instruments, if you take Behrman's Wave Train or Mumma's Hornpipe for example, it is fairly impossible that any two performances could be the same. I am not suggesting that the products are musically-aesthetically better/equal to current eai (I am far from qualified to make such rash generalisations) but simply that the relationship between performer, acoustic instrument and electronics is as mature as that of current improvisation. I could be wrong.

[gohleekwang]

Creel Pone is another good archival 'label', if you're looking. Staaplaat might stock them, but otherwise try mimaroglu

Thanks. i seem / heard some releases on the series, but i was too slow to see the big picture.
http://www.discogs.com/label/Creel+Pone" onclick= "window.open(this.href);return false;

now i m really in trouble, where i can find time & money for all this?

[snailed]

i understand what stephen is saying, particular because you really don't see the sort of advanced computer interactive stuff which has been the major development of the past 20 years in eai (thank god... because it usually amounts to 'hey look what i can do' rather than good music) - i just think most people took your statement as a judgment on the development of the music in general, or on the aesthetics, in which i think the major developments have taken place over the past 20 years - but rather you were talking about the technical interactivity between performer and instrument. however i do think there have been developments and refinements in the area of interactivity as well, even if it's just the performers getting more comfortable and having a greater availability of said technology, being able to grow up with it and use it as their main instrument.

for the classic stuff, creel pone has some pretty good stuff, particularly the jean claude eloy 'shanti' release. i also really like the title track on morris knight's after guernica. if you compare this stuff to something like the aforementioned 'the room' or 'between', you can really hear the refinement in style and aesthetic that's gone on (whether you prefer it or not... i mostly do, but like both and still listen to the classic stuff)

[bedouin]

head to head comparisons seem a little unfair to me, as eai gathers from many different genres (avant garde classical, noise, jazz, amm, electronic). Xenakis seemed from another planet when heard in the 60s - I mean truly shocking - and indeed his influences might have been a lot more limited compared to now when we are bombarded daily by a zillion of global media and information.

I think that the disconnect here (or at least in the earlier thread) is because what some of us perceive as eai (maybe wrongly) includes very different musicians and their music as a whole - not just specific discs. I mean what does Butcher or Malfatti have in common with, Akiyama, Marchetti, or Domenico Sciajno. (to pick 5 names of different nationalities)

I even find difficult to associate Sugimoto, Nakamura, Akiyama under one genre. IMO the only common thing here is ethics. Or, a continuous quest for creative (social?) freedom. Which really is what I perceive jazz to be too. But eai is not Jazz, and equally it seems like eai is not a genre, more than postmodernism is.

One can narrow the term to cover Rowe, Nakamura, certain Erst releases, and a bunch of other musicians and labels that do experimental/electronic/noise only. in which case the term becomes much more focused, and jazz (and classical in my view), has very little to do with it (if any).

[7/4]

But eai is not Jazz, and equally it seems like eai is not a genre, more than postmodernism is.

uh oh...not a genre?

[Stephen]

i just think most people took your statement as a judgment on the development of the music in general, or on the aesthetics, in which i think the major developments have taken place over the past 20 years - but rather you were talking about the technical interactivity between performer and instrument.

yeah, as usual around here, all too easy to tread on toes.

If we are talking about nuanced usage then yes the music of now makes a lot of old stuff seem a bit brash (which I quite like) but the strategies are (almost) all the same.

[howsthatsound]

i guess i just tend to bristle a bit when i hear people say something new is more "aesthetically refined" than something older, because it sounds like they are saying it is objectively better somehow. now if you mean refined, as sugar is to sugar cane, then fine, but whether i think the sugar or the cane is better comes down to whether i want a cup of coffee or a barrel of ethanol.

it's interesting to see how it holds up when compared purely musically in 2008, and for me, it mostly doesn't.

i really don't think that's possible, so i generally obstain personally.

[Alastair]

i also really like the title track on morris knight's after guernica. if you compare this stuff to something like the aforementioned 'the room' or 'between', you can really hear the refinement in style and aesthetic that's gone on (whether you prefer it or not... i mostly do, but like both and still listen to the classic stuff)

Oof...that Morris Knight album really isn't very good...