The Anonymous Zone

[jon abbey]

And I apologise if I tarred you with a broadbrush generalisation about the extent to which the reputation of the musicians can affect our listening. As I said to Yannis above, I concede that there are some people who can put such considerations aside, and perhaps you’re one of them, so sorry. But as I also said to him, I think that’s rare.

I don't think anyone can really put them aside, but I think that's the point. it's a much more complicated relationship than you seem to think, virtually no one blindly accepts all output from their favorite artist/s uncritically.

I'd even argue (as I did above) that it's more difficult for musicians with long track records to fully satisfy listeners, but this time with a specific example: I saw John Butcher play solo here a month or so ago. if I had no history with John Butcher, had never seen or heard him before, I think I would have enjoyed that set decidedly more than I did. it's true that a listener is more willing to give repeated listens to a musician or label that they've especially connected with in the past, but I don't see anything wrong with that. again, if a musician or label puts out a string of duds in a row (as perceived by a specific person), that person will stop paying attention to the musician or label most of the time.

one thing that I didn't say before because it just occurred to me in the last day or so: a project like this would be much more interesting to me personally if it was put together by someone very young but knowledgable, someone like Jake Morely (leroysghost) or David Grundy a few years ago before their tastes were public at all. this would make it much more of a truly "Anonymous Zone": anonymously created but publicly curated by someone with very well known curatorial tastes doesn't add up to anonymous from my perspective.

[I wish I'd never started this thread...sigh]

yep, god forbid any actual back and forth discussion occurs anywhere, we wouldn't want that.

[jon abbey]

For the record I don’t believe in objectivity in either listening or in musical taste; it’s one of the areas where Jon and I have major disagreements).

just to clarify, I'm not sure why you think we disagree on this (although that's usually a safe default, since we disagree on virtually everything). I don't believe in pure objectivity either, but I do believe that one can train one's self towards objectivity (if one wants to, which isn't always desirable IMO).

nothing is universal, all art is probably loved by some fraction of the worldwide populace and hated by some other fraction of it (and ignored by the vast majority in most cases). I do believe that one can largely or entirely separate personal relationships from 'professional' perspective, though, or at least I can (I could give numerous examples but don't see the need, also I gave a few upthread).

[Wombatz]

This idea of being able to "See" objectively what it is before one, without the contamination of prejudice."

See, I'm pretty shocked anyone alive now would even consider that as a possibility in any situation ever.

That was the objectivity thing, picked out by Joe already.

Richard once proposed a project where anonymous recordings would be written about by as many pros and laymen as he could drum up. I thought that was great and signed up for it, it would have told me about comparative approaches to music and the challenge would have been focused on writing/coming to terms.

Your project, on the other hand, is challenging the listener, and accompanying that with a set of assumptions and some ideology. That is Mattin territory to me, though it's a different medium/ideology.

Apart from that, I just don't think it's very healthy to worry about if some artists are privileged/getting too much of the cake. Often the cake exists just for that artist and is not transferable to anyone else. Just as it's not healthy to worry about should one close their eyes during listening or is that too devout (see Richard and David lately). Too much meta, too little meat.

[faster]

[I wish I'd never started this thread...sigh]

That's too bad--I think it's been a useful and interesting thread and probably isn't over yet.

[schiksalgemeinschaft]

I'm commenting on this purely from a listener perspective, no axes to grind as a musician, producer, critic or record label owner.


It's actually very simple: I don't want to sit/sift through twelve anonymous pieces of 15 minutes online, in the hope of finding something I might connect with. Why would I? I didn't find the time to connect with lots of music that I know will probably be good and that's lying around in my apartment. Does that make me less of a music fan? I imagine lots of the readers here are in the same situation of abundance. Ironically, I might listen to some tracks of the AZone based on some reviews though.

There is so much music out there. There's at least 40 albums waiting on my shelves to be thoroughly listened too, or even to be listened to for the first time. (I all bought those, btw.) So, from a time management viewpoint, I welcome being guided by names, reviews, etc. If Brian or Richard or Jesse (or whoever whose tastes I've come to know over the years, on whatever site) posts a raving review about a musician I don't know on their blog, or if I read an interesting recommendation of whatever nature wherever, and I think I might like it based on the way it's described: well, isn't that brilliant? Of course, sometimes, even then the actual music sucks. Taking a change mostly pays off though. Like that Dadawah record Jon convinced me of buying because of one line in his ErstDist-mailing years ago.

Sure, I do have preconceptions when I listen to music. But these preconceptions also start to form after I've listened to the first minute of an anonymous track. It's probably very, very beneficiary for lots of anonymous tracks if I've read something online beforehand, st that says I have to be patient enough and let it develop for 10 minutes, cause otherwise I might press the forward or skip button - hell, I wouldn't do that if I would have know it's a new track from Keith or Deathspell Omega. Names, reviews and year end lists are not the alpha & omega, but they're handy. I'm not a label owner nor a critic that has mastered the craft of listening to dozens of records being sent to them by some random unknown guy, without knowing what to expect next, hoping it might be the next gem in their catalogue or next wholehearted obscure recommendation the public will rave about as well.

And sure, I do like surprises, I do like to dive into all my records (old and new) with open ears, and I know (because of reviews, previous experience, etc.) that, with new stuff I get, I probably will be surprised, even if I've read the reviews or discussions upfront, and even if I know the names of the people involved. As Wombatz said, I do not listen to my stars with misty-eyed adulation. Over the last 2 decades, I've given up on tons of them.
And surprise surprise, I even get surprised by artists I've listened to over and over again. For a recent example, Crosshatches comes to mind, and I'll probably be surprised when I get Songs for Nothing too. But then again, I have e.g. this 40-cd set with the full organ works of Bach, I've been through about half of those, and they keep on surprising me too, although Bach has been extensively written about. And even if I put on works I've already listened to over and over again, some still keep on surprising me, or they might not surprises me, whatever, some take me to points of sheer exaltation, mind blown, jaw dropped -- is that because I never visit a Bach forum?


On another point, I'm not convinced by the online format of the Anonymous Zone. For one, you can't play the tracks in a continuous stream, and I don't have the patience to download them all and put them in my iTunes - my hard drive is running out of space too -, nor press play again after every 10 or 15 minutes. (I also don't care much for just tracks of only 10-20 minutes or less, unless they're pop music of some sort - singles, you know? In taomud, I mostly like albums, July Mountain notwithstanding.)

But even if continuous streaming were possible, I mostly don't like compilations. Granted, Simon might not think of the AZ as an online compilation, but it, in fact, is. I might be missing out something, fair enough - I'm missing out on so much anyway -, previous experiences with compilations (and there have been a lot) have taught me they're pretty much a waste of time. And yes, that's just a knee-jerk reaction - so I'll probably listen to a comp if I've read something good about it, the Relay Archive 2007-2008 was fantastic. Then again, what's the effect of a good compilation on my kind of music lover/consumer, besides it being a good album on it's own terms? Well, I haven't sought out full albums of excellent tracks by the Relay participants, unless those full albums got good reviews etc. A name might keep on ringing a bell for some time though, so I might read a review more carefully (since there are too much reviews too, but that's another matter). One swallow (track) doesn't make a summer. Again, I have too much other stuff to listen to already.

I'm not even sure the cd (or the LP) will be dead soon. Most of the "scenes" I follow still release more albums as physical copies then they ever did - maybe volumes per release aren't as high anymore, could be. I'm probably not the norm, but I'm buying more vinyl than I did ten years ago. Of course, I listen to lots of stuff on my computer, but I do that when I have only my computer (or iPod) around, or I do it on YouTube, Bandcamp, etc. to check out one or two tracks of some album I'd like to check out (because I read a review or some other recommendation). Preferably, I pop in a cd or put on an lp. What's the point of having a high quality download, cable up your laptop (and by that turning it immobile), if you can put on an actual physical release? High quality downloads are good for my iPod, or the occasional iTunes shuffle bonanza. The AZ requires a more or less stable computer&excellent-play-back-system set-up, and most people just don't have that.


So, all and all, what I expect from music providers (labels or self-releasing musicians) is simply this: put out amazing, beautiful, challenging, worthwhile music on a convenient format, and if it gets picked up by the inevitable, murky hierarchies of the opinionated Bourdieu-ian field, I'll gladly buy it and let it surround me, preferably in a physical form. (A friend's recommendation on Facebook might do the trick too.) If it surprises me, it gets a plus. I guess I'm just a lazy, old fashioned, capitalistic consumer with an unhealthy fixation on new and original cultural artifacts. (But hey, I do like to stream tv series!)

Like Wombatz said: give us meat, primarily.



Just to be clear though, since the above probably is all a bit too harsh in tone: I do, very, very much, appreciate that there are people out there that put out music, and try out new stuff. I'm just taking a rain check on the AZ.


(And oh, and I don't like that romantic image of the mask very much, my appreciation for the role of the jester notwithstanding.)

[Dan Warburton]

I'm rather enjoying this thread, actually - more than the music, I have to say. Agree with many of the points expressed above, obvious though some of them seem (of course you wouldn't expect Simon Reynell to handpick the Peter Brötzmann Tentet any more than you'd expect to find a Eugene Chadbourne bluegrass album on Erstwhile..). And would people here have taken the time to check out the more anomymous anonymous zone you're describing, Jon? I rather doubt it. I like names, I like knowing who's doing things and who's telling me they're worth listening to. All that talk of chimps and Basquiats reminds me of this - anyone remember this one?
http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magaz ... ext.html#7

[jon abbey]

And would people here have taken the time to check out the more anomymous anonymous zone you're describing, Jon? I rather doubt it.

you're asking the wrong person, I'm honestly surprised so many people are checking out this one. but then again I don't even generally listen to experimental music on the radio, as I like to know what I'm listening to when I listen to it.

[Dan Warburton]

I'm honestly surprised so many people are checking out this one

How many is "so many" Jon (or maybe Simon would like to reveal the staggering hitcount?)?

[jon abbey]

I have no idea obviously, just going from discussion here and on FB and that Brian and RIchard and Jesse have all already written about it on their blogs.

[fslmy]

Has IHM ever done a blindfold test before? i'd be down for that..

[visa tapani]

And would people here have taken the time to check out the more anomymous anonymous zone you're describing, Jon? I rather doubt it.

I'm honestly surprised so many people are checking out this one.

Ironically people are checking out this one because it's NOT anonymous, because they have some trust for the curatorial taste of Simon. Personally I don't find listening to these much more "anonymous" than buying an AT release by someone I'm not very familiar with. It's true that normally I'd only buy a record like that if I had heard some recommendations for it, but that's a tempting course of action wit AZ too - just download the tracks recommended by Richard/Brian/whoever.

Unlike Schik, though, I'm partial to listening to single tracks in this way, as I have no special love towards the album length/format. In much of the music I listen to (both older and contemporary classical and electroacustic music) CD albums have been pretty much compilations of individual, loosely related pieces anyway. And since the individual pieces are so long in AZ and the whole thing clocks at 3h, this doesn't really feel like an album. Twenty minutes is a pretty common length for one set in an improvised concert, and I quite like short, focused listening sessions of that length. Part of the difference is that I'm sitting on a totally different side of the digital/physical divide than Schik - I haven't owned a vinyl/cd player for years and my computer is always connected to the best playback system I have. Anything else than digital files is highly inconvenient to me.

[schiksalgemeinschaft]

Part of the difference is that I'm sitting on a totally different side of the digital/physical divide than Schik - I haven't owned a vinyl/cd player for years and my computer is always connected to the best playback system I have. Anything else than digital files is highly inconvenient to me.

yeah, that's probably one of the more important division lines for the AZ to work. Granted, folks on my side'll probably be outnumbered sooner than later. the only thing that remains after that is that I like to know what/who I'm listening too indeed, since that's more convenient for me.

[joeperucki]

you're asking the wrong person, I'm honestly surprised so many people are checking out this one. but then again I don't even generally listen to experimental music on the radio, as I like to know what I'm listening to when I listen to it.

It is legal free music so I cannot resist. Thanks Simon, there were a few tracks I liked and will listen to again. H in particular.

[Jesse]

The F track is beautiful. Crank it up.

[Keith Rowe]

Hello
Warning!! for some of you what follows will be complete garbage…… for others it will be rich pickings to my lack of logic… inconsistency … contradictions…
Anachronistic whatever….
Well,.. I guess I should step up and say,.. with regard to Anonymous Zones some of this tangle is my fault in that, it was a in a car conversation with Simon that possibly set this idea in to play, I recall saying something to the effect that if I was the minister culture I’d have a period were works (thinking of an art gallery) were anonymous, encouraging folk to relate to the work before them, seeking out any significance, if it resonated .. etc. rather than locating its significance or importance via the little white panel down to the side. I think the point I was trying to make was, attempting to locate significance was beyond the merely I like, I don’t like, is it good or bad judgments, but about training your eye (or ear).. to being able to “see” what that object/work is.. there in front of you, detecting how well it is drawn (for example).
It was the Life Drawing Class where I first encountered this discrepancy between what was before me, and what I made of it, constantly failing over and over again, then over the years gradually bit by bit clawing my way towards being able to detect what was well drawn and that which was not.
Mozart… for example Curzon’s 7’04” adagio K488, compared to Grimaud’s 7’38 for me is a question of drawing / the phrase, Curzon’s articulation is so so well drawn, Grimaud’s micro seconds of hesitation at critical points seem awkward, as if the phrase is too agenda heavy, or possibly the affectation is opaque, then again maybe it’s the case that the Goodman and Wallace recording (Curzon) better communicates the circumstance than the Gruber (Grimaud) one might argue what is before Curzon and Grimaud is essentially the same information?.
The way we see / hear is of course is determined by our education and epoch (needless to say), mine transverses the stultifying classical through to the situationist - modernism. it would seem to me that we are all supplely different in this regard.
So the Anonymous zone an attempt to encounter a work, not to identify who made it, not to judge it, but to attempt to hear what is there, does it have something to say? is there a secondary set of significances that lay below the surface? (rather like with colour were you train the eye to locate the secondary colour, then the tertiary etc (until you go mad) AZ to extending the range and virtuosity of listening, so what we are talking about here is… this is NOT the only way to approach a work, but I feel a necessary skill… its purpose is not to embolden the veil of ignorance, but to develop a skill…for me the moments where just listening have been important is within the music of Christian Wolff (Edges One or two people etc.) sitting there absorbing the sound, there is a emotional sensation utterly unique to “hear without association”, then to emit one’s own sound, (not in response but at the scores direction) is this the same skill of sensing the music “in” time / music “as” time parameters? maybe I should say a little more about the emotional sensation, its like nothing else I’ve experienced…
the utter stillness…the sense of space… the slowness of time…the very opposite of Cardew’s make one thousand sounds as quickly as possible ( the best I managed was in three seconds)
Listening to the tracks its becoming clear I prefer the tracks generally not liked by the commentators.. Ha! what a surprise.. good luck with listening.
Of course I recognise many will not feel the need to develop such a listening skill, that’s no problem, each to their own… only “ A blind cat happens on a dead rat”
The very best to you all
Keith
Please forgive any sloppiness, written on the fly ….

[Charon]

A very illuminating response! This thread is in danger of becoming interesting....

I sense a definite link between what you've said here, Keith, and the "This idea of being able to "See" objectively what it is before one, without the contamination of prejudice." quote which appeared further up in the thread (or did that get deleted when this discussion was split off?)

I find it very interesting the contrast between the idea expressed elsewhere of being able to train oneself into some kind of objective judgement about a work and the idea that I'm picking up from Keith's post above about being able to train oneself to see the work objectively without it necessarily being about judgement.

And of course it's just priceless, given the hostility towards the AZ concept expressed in this thread (especially by certain participants, perhaps those who were surprised that so many were paying attention to it...), that the idea should have come from a discussion between Simon and Keith!

[faster]

not to judge it

but to attempt to hear what is there, does it have something to say?

being able to detect what was well drawn and that which was not.

Am I alone in seeing at best a contradiction and at worst a disingenuousness here?

Of course I recognise many will not feel the need to develop such a listening skill, that’s no problem, each to their own… only “ A blind cat happens on a dead rat”

In other words: "You may disagree, and that's okay, but your way is inferior." Or am I misinterpreting that colorful adage somehow? (Looking around the internets, I see it interpreted as "blind luck"--though not "deaf luck," fortunately!)

[William Hutson]

i have a different question for you folks, one which i haven't seen raised yet, and it relates to an artist's 'signature sound'. put simply: if it is revealed that the author of track D is somebody other than keith rowe (or at the very least, an artist who participates in N:Q) will we feel that that author has 'ripped off' several elements of mr. rowe's sound? (just an example— i'm not trying to call anybody out, here).

thinking about this whole context-free music issue made me wonder: if i listened to, say, 'maruto' for the first time without knowing the music was performed by toshimaru nakemura, i'd likely guess that it was anyway. artists are allowed to repeat themselves to some degree— it's how we recognize their work, track their development, judge what 'period' of their playing the piece comes from, etc. having a signature sound is, in this area of music, as well as in others, usually considered a positive thing. but if after hearing 'maruto,' it was revealed to me that the music had, in fact, been performed by somebody i'd never heard of, the piece would be significantly diminished in my opinion— not because anything actually changed about the music itself, but because i would consider it such a wholesale rip-off of nakamura's style, and signature sound palette, that to have made the album, that unknown artist would have committed an offense (in my view). an album i previously loved would suffer quite a bit by the revelation of its context.

look: nobody owns a sound, or a style. i think influence, homage, convergent evolution, etc is par for the course in any genre. but i've been thinking about this because of an opaque comment a well-known improvisor made on fb about some other artist finding a degree of success by stealing his signature sounds. as i read that— and wondered who he could have been referring to— i was listening to one of the AZ tracks.

[Wombatz]

And of course it's just priceless, given the hostility towards the AZ concept expressed in this thread (especially by certain participants, perhaps those who were surprised that so many were paying attention to it...), that the idea should have come from a discussion between Simon and Keith!

Since I'm among the most openly hostile and recently I've gotten behind Keith's idea of competing with the dead, that would probably include me?

Well, I do think it makes sense that he would want to check how music sounds stripped of all reference since he's sort of overloading his music with references. It still doesn't work, though. Very simply: if you take his example of drawings in an exhibition space(!) and the info beside it, there are today tons of mad talented young people who want to be artists one day and will draw you jawdropping drawings from c. 1890 with just that slight hint of modernity that makes it look pretty cutting-edge for its time. This is real talent, there is some real quality there, and it makes no sense whatsoever looking at these or listening to anything as openly derivative (eg) and enjoy it for "what it is" through lack of better knowledge if one can easily help that by adding basic information.

(I'm not saying you shouldn't listen or look at all, you should, to support your local scene, your friends mad talent, etc.)

That strangely the terms Keith has chosen could be read as just as insulting as the original AZ agenda (see faster's post), probably is due to the weakness of the project when it comes to realizing any of these ideas.

(P.S. Oh, crossposted with William above, some overlap.)

[Adrian]

I've simply had two pleasant evenings listening to music that really clicked with me, without having had to choose which artist I would like to listen to, and which particular release of theirs to pick. I was surprised that I don't seem to need to know the details in order to enjoy the work (and I do know that I tend to get a bit fanboy-ish at times)
Also, I kind of feel it works as a coherent whole - at least to my ears, but then I don't possess the necessary skills to work out who made which track, and what instruments were used, nor if the tracks are any good music wise; I just like what I hear, and even if I don't have the eloquence to explain why, that doesn't mean simply liking a piece of music isn't a valid opinion, in my opinion...
So, two thumbs up, and thanks Simon!