ErstPop?

would I be kicked off IHM if I admitted I love most pop music to the large majority of eai stuff I've heard over the last 5 years...?

Brave man, brave man...

*hides copy of Madonna's Confessions on a Dance Floor*

damn man... you must've misunderstood what I was saying....I display my Barry White, Chic and France Joli CDs right next to everything else...it's all out in the open.
why should I be ashamed of my musical tastes??
who the hell gives anyone the right to judge what I listen to and use their superiority complexes to play judge and jury?
damn, it's only music...it's all good

thoughts, you say?

Yep. And the expression thereof.

damn man... you must've misunderstood what I was saying....I display my Barry White, Chic and France Joli CDs right next to everything else...it's all out in the open.

Heh, I was only joking...

Madonna sits next to Mayhem in my collection. MZ.412 and Moby are just below them.

Tomas' post may have been a little too agressive/personal, but I can understand his annoyance. Darko's post IMO showed an immense lack of knowledge about the music he was discussing. He didn't criticise Tomas directly or any of the other musicians mentioned, rather paint over them all with one generalised wash that didn't even make sense.

Darko has every right to dislike the music coming from 'the Swiss' right now, but at the same time he revealed to me at least how little he actually knew about it. Comparing the music of Jason Kahn to Bernhard G?nter is just ridiculous to me.

look, if mudd or someone else thinks my earlier post should be deleted, fine go ahead. i don't even mind, as some of the people concerned have already read this by now, which is a good thing. i just think someone has to point futurenow to the fact that his talking couldn't be further removed from reality. i mean the kind of statement "this collective of musicians is influenced by this or that or is trying to achieve this or that"... - at least speaking of the musicians i know it's clear that such collective developments into one determined direction (i.e. "smooth", "ambient") do not exist. you would hear that, too, if you'd listen. plus some of these assumptions somehow have lead to quite disrespectful statements (e.g. questioning the artists integrity on the fimav thread by insinuating they would go for the "smooth" stuff cause, you know, that's what they are "paid for"). there have been a couple of similar comments coming from futurenow or, to a lesser extent, from fearandpanic or mari, too. in the end, i don't care if they concern the "swiss musicians", or the "british islands" or whoever. i just think that putting people in these drawers and making that kind of generalizations is ridiculous. are you not interested in the work of individuals? or do you really judge art according to those templates (i.e. "the swiss")?

anyway, enough thread hijacking. do with it what you want.

p.s. the cursing in my first post, however, was unnecessary. i apologize for that.

or do you really judge art according to those templates (i.e. "the swiss") .

I've never used that term in my life, nor would I group disparate musicians crudely by nationality (in fact, I aruged against that attitude exactly in the "eai for newbies" thread a little while ago). There are those on this board who do, however, they're in this discussion also, and they're not the ones referred to above. But they (fairly shrewdly) keep their critical comments elsewhere, that's all. I'm not a great fan of rubbing criticism in people's faces, obviously, as it leads to situations like this, but at the same time these are only aesthetic opinions, not attacks on anyone's person (that line is crossed a little freely, it seems).

But as regards the musicians you refer to, it would be quite easy to simply make a compilation of recent reviews by Brian O. on Bagatellen that would seem to contradict your assertions that nothing along those lines is being perceived as happening "in reality." Perhaps he's equally deserving of your outburts.

before all, I don't think Tomas Korber's post should be re-edited or something else, everyone should have a right to react as they wish to.

------------------------------------------------------

Darko has every right to dislike the music coming from 'the Swiss' right now, but at the same time he revealed to me at least how little he actually knew about it. Comparing the music of Jason Kahn to Bernhard G?nter is just ridiculous to me.

This is now the critical part I am willing to explain, since it waved a couple of waves. I even planned to continue on this, since I initially thought that not many people would have idea what I am talking about, but I don't think this would be a short one, really.

What would I find in common between things that soon would be up on Erstpop and "Swiss" group here (minus Moslang, in some part) ? That they are going away further from improvisation, in many senses. As people know, I hold improvised music to be most radical musical expression and every distancing from it I see as taking a crucial components out of that complex mosaic of improvised music.
How I see players like Muller, Kanh, Korber, Steinbruchel (to take the most 'famous') distancing from the principles of the improvised music ? By paying crucial attention to the how "end result" would look like, which is turning improvised music upside down.
Improvised music we like so much (at least I do) just because it accentuates very process of music making, process of mutual learning, making mistakes, process of co-operation and confrontation with yourself and your playing partners - and that's something I miss from certain share of the today's improvised music. What happened to the previous generations of improvisers is happening to the certain musicians now - before even actual playing started, in their head they have exact vision of sound they would like to achieve. One fan touched on this phenomenon in these words:
"[...] There is a tendency to focus on the "individual creator"/genius in both the classical-composer and glitch/electronica/sound-art traditions. The tendency in both those, too, is to work and rework the musical detail into a finished work in a process of painstaking revision?in traditional composed music this is obvious, but in "ambient electronica" this is most often the case too. (Pieces are opened in sound editors or sequencers and tinkered with until they're absolutely "perfect"). Now, this is obviously getting away from the stylistic features of ?eai? (which are many), and to the listener, ultimately: does it matter how the resulting music?which they hear "spontaneously" anyway?was arrived at (improvised or not?). Should it? I think it does: the process is important for the musicians, how they organise themselves, and ultimately this leaves its mark on the music.

Given this antagonism to having the music fixed as a finished work, I think it is to free improv that the ethical and musical-philosophical foundations of "eai" belong (more than to any other single sphere of music). New improvised music can incorporate every stylistic features and development it likes, of course, but it must do this without abandoning its philosophical foundations--foundations which lie more in free improv than in anything else. Its stylistic language is varied and open, so maybe a distinction of convenience should be drawn between surface (resulting) stylistic features and basic philosophical-musical foundations (community music making, ad hoc groupings, resistant to commodity culture, etc.), but ultimately these can't be separated." (this is taken from the document that could be found on addlimb.org)

In another addlimb.org document, we read Tomas Korber saying:

"To me, "improvisation" is a method of working just as "composition" (and all shades of grey in between) is. I'm not an improviser in the sense of being primarily concerned with the process of music making. My main concern is the result, the outcome, the music itself. If this goal is achieved through improvisational means or not is something that doesn't matter to me. ".

I'd here repeat the upper words "...the process is important for the musicians, how they organise themselves, and ultimately this leaves its mark on the music". This marks could be clearly seen on albums like "Blinks", "Live and replayed", "Eight landscapes", "Perspectives", "Momentan Def"... (right now I'm hearing "Timelines" and if I have something to add, I'll do it in "recent listenings" thread)
I'd quote one more musician, Otomo Yoshihide, who said in one occasion:

"Question: When does free music work for you?
Otomo: That's a philosophical question. I think I'm always [concerned with] which direction each part is going. It's really difficult always. My ideas are changing. I can't say exactly what way but for me, the most important thing is the process."

My own personal impression is that the players we know from Switzerland got very keen on modern "sound art/drone electronica" postulates: finished work, enjoyable sound object, no mistakes, (often) no harshness, it's the end result that matters.
I think that kind of perception is alien to free improvisation, because it's not free improvisation any more.
It could be whatever you'd like it to be, but it's not improvised music, because you're governed by something else, foreign to improvisation. How many times you have seen word "ambient" comes up in the reviews of Gunter Muller's recent albums ?
I don't like ambient music, I think goals of improvised music are not on the other side of ambient music, but they even are not on the same level. Nothing, in fact, is on the same level with improvised music, because it's totally different attitude, stance, view, approach.
I respect Gunter Muller very much, he's a great musician, as is Moslang (no doubt), as much as "Bechamel", "Brackwater", "Tint" and "Presque chic" are good, really good albums, and many more besides those that I now mention.

I didn't want to imply that there are clear lines of connection between Swiss players and obvious pop references that soon would find their place on Erstpop. But they're connected in one distancing from the improvised music's musico-philosophical assumptions, which form improvised music and its intentions in its very core.
+ I don't see drone electronica as particulary challenging music, on the contrary...


p.s. the first 20 minutes of "Timelines" just confirm my thoughts...

or do you really judge art according to those templates (i.e. "the swiss") .

I've never used that term in my life, nor would I group disparate musicians crudely by nationality (in fact, I aruged against that attitude exactly in the "eai for newbies" thread a little while ago). There are those on this board who do, however, they're in this discussion also, and they're not the ones referred to above. But they (fairly shrewdly) keep their critical comments elsewhere, that's all.

you are probably right here. the reason why i named you is that i had in mind your comment (or should i say approval of futurenow's comment) in the fimav thread. i don't read through all topics on IHM, so it's admittedly hard to keep track of who said what exactly. didn't mean to put words in your mouth, sorry.

But as regards the musicians you refer to, it would be quite easy to simply make a compilation of recent reviews by Brian O. on Bagatellen that would seem to contradict your assertions that nothing along those lines is being perceived as happening "in reality." Perhaps he's equally deserving of your outburts.

well, i never said that this isn't being perceived this way. it obviously is (hence futurenow's posts). i just happen to know the work of the musicians in question rather well, and i can tell you it's not true. to name some examples: there is absolutely no development in the direction insinuated by futurenow and others in the case of jason kahn. "fields" (like it or not, i'm not arguing about that here) is "rawer" than some of the things he did 2-3 years ago. most of m?slangs gigs on the japan tour last year were rather on the harsh side (not as in "harsh noise", but very very far away from so called "lowercase" music). i personally don't care whether a musician prefers a "harsher" or "mellower" aesthetic, as i think this says nothing at all about the quality of the music. i'm just saying that generally there is no such development (the only musician of those mentioned were i see a development over the last couple of years away from using rawer material into using more mellow material here in switzerland is g?nter m?ller).

i don't know if brian o. perceives this the way futurenow does, and if so, i'd disagree with him. however brian has always talked about specific records and the music in question. i see very little dealing with the actual music in futurenows posts, he seems more concerned with ideologies.

I don't know Darko. There isn't much in your above post that sits comfortably with me. The freedom that I associate with eai is probably the most appealing aspect for me. What you state above seems to impose pretty strict boundaries. What do you mean when you talk about "philosophical foundations"? Why must eai remain within these foundations?

Given that eai is so notoriously difficult to pin down, would it be reasonable to suggest that the elements of free improv which you hold so dear are merely a small part of eai as a whole? If eai's the tree, maybe only a few of the branches are as radical as you'd like them to be.

I'm excited about ErstPop. I have no idea whether it will appeal to me at all but those myspace samples sure hit the spot. One of the common caveats about eai is its inability to reach a larger audience. I don't see the benefit in reacting against anything which may actually do that.

thanks for your clarifications here, futurenow. this was by far the most "concrete" of your statements concerning all of this (imo). it's easier to talk like this, i think.

i can only speak for myself here, but you are absolutely right about my quote from the interview on addlimb: i don't care much for what you call the "improvised music's musico-philosophical assumptions". it's interesting to read otomo's statement in contrast, good point. though otomo is obviously not dogmatic about it, as his many composed or semi-composed projects show.

but how can you compare improvisation vs. ambient? the former refers to a way of making music, a working method. the latter to an aesthetic. improvisation can lead to all sorts of music: noise, jazz, rock, ambient, drone, whatever... i don't see your point here.

I don't know Darko. There isn't much in your above post that sits comfortably with me. The freedom that I associate with eai is probably the most appealing aspect for me. What you state above seems to impose pretty strict boundaries. What do you mean when you talk about "philosophical foundations"? Why must eai remain within these foundations?

Given that eai is so notoriously difficult to pin down, would it be reasonable to suggest that the elements of free improv which you hold so dear are merely a small part of eai as a whole? If eai's the tree, maybe only a few of the branches are as radical as you'd like them to be.

I'm excited about ErstPop. I have no idea whether it will appeal to me at all but those myspace samples sure hit the spot. One of the common caveats about eai is its inability to reach a larger audience. I don't see the benefit in reacting against anything which may actually do that.

generally agreeing with this.

I just wanted to chime in and say that the music coming from the likes of Korber, M?ller, Kahn and Christian Weber is some of the most interesting and enjoyable music I've heard recently. I am tremendously excited about the upcoming concerts at Issue Project Room.

I am tremendously excited about the upcoming concerts at Issue Project Room.

me too, I talked to jason k. about this a bit the other night, it looks like the 'timelines' performance on the second night will be in the area of 120 minutes long. very curious about that...

or do you really judge art according to those templates (i.e. "the swiss") .

I've never used that term in my life, nor would I group disparate musicians crudely by nationality

certainly. i don't recall having done that either, but i'd say geographical proximity matters, playing together matters and it's some ideas that the musicians in question share and around which they gather, apparently, that are problematic to me.

i'd like tomas to point me to my disrespectful comments, as i'm not sure we share an understanding of what respect is, actually. respect is possible in criticism, too. and no matter how (in)articulate, i care enough to comment on what i dislike, hoping to communicate my idea of improvement. i'm not (yet) indifferent, and my disappointment is due to the fact that the ideas i cherish are simply used and not engaged by the musicians who seem to actually understand them, or at least were once willing to.
i respect improv...
and i don't see how my verbal expression of disagreement with these musicians is any more disrespectful towards them than their music, in which i hear the same, is towards me.

But as regards the musicians you refer to, it would be quite easy to simply make a compilation of recent reviews by Brian O. on Bagatellen that would seem to contradict your assertions that nothing along those lines is being perceived as happening "in reality." Perhaps he's equally deserving of your outburts.

but is the tone affirmative?

concerning the thread's topic, which hardly interests me, i'd say your beloved 'eai' could be the pop of its time without recycling (sustaining?) the pop elements of previous periods. but that wouldn't be as easy...

and before I step into another IHM adventure every post could be, I'd like to ask people to be more careful with "dogmas", "stigmas", "totalitarianism" - once again. It seems that some of the readers would throw those terms at me the more as I'm asking them to stop, look around and think on it, a bit.
I realise that my views are for some people unacceptable, but we're here to talk and discuss. No one is imposing nothing on other people, much more as no one has adequate means to implement any effective measure on anyone's actions or thoughts. The worst thing you could do to yourself is - to read what I write, without barely waiting to click on "post reply" button and get into another relentless bashing of me.

I don't know Darko. There isn't much in your above post that sits comfortably with me. The freedom that I associate with eai is probably the most appealing aspect for me. What you state above seems to impose pretty strict boundaries. What do you mean when you talk about "philosophical foundations"? Why must eai remain within these foundations?

ok, but I have no strict intention for my posts to sit comfortably with the rest of the people on this forum. I write what I think, and when I think, I try my very best. I go in details as far as I can, I always strive to explain my positions the best I can, when needed I'm not affraid to name names, to name albums etc, because I believe in open, rational and thorough discussion.

The "freedom" I associate with (contemporary) improvised music (I try to slowly abandon the unlucky "eai" name) is surely the most appealing aspect for me. In fact, I think we all here are attracted to the improvisation from that very reason, we love its "freedom", although determination of that supposed "freedom" is something we could spend months discussing about. I define "freedom" not as some abstract absolute that calls me with whispering voice: "yes, everything goes, c'mon", but as a recognition of necessities, recognition of surrounding factors that have some impact on given subject which aspires for "freedom".
In certain moment in history, when all pre-conditions for that were met, musicians self-consciously came to the idea that idea of freely improvised music is possible. I'm not thinking on prehistoric ages, but on the sixth decade of the previous century, although certain voices about necessity of such musical expression could be heard even earlier.
What improvised music stood for ? Everything that traditional music didn't ! Where traditional music said "notation", improv said "momentum"; where traditional music said "order above all", improv said "momental impulse above all"; where traditional music demanded unquestioned discipline and obedience, improv demanded total liberation of our creative abilities in that very moment; where traditional music admired "end result - a work came to by painstaking work of a genius", improv admired raw beauty of the process of music making itself; where traditional music demanded hard musical training, improvised music called on the musically uneducated people to participate etc.
Why ? Because improvised music is interested in music as it is, as it is being developed by us, improvised music shouldn't be interested in ideas of how music "should" sound.
And that's what's liberating about improvised music - its desire and ability to include "ordinary listener" actively into creation process, right into what is, outside of improvised music, called "small secrets of the great masters", to hear and see decision-making, dilemmas, hesitations, confrontation, communication right before your ears and eyes. Jack Wright refered to these characteristics with words:

"IV. Free improvisation is, in its idea of itself, the only music that is not tragic in this way, not searching for the end, not seeking its perfection, not repeated, not corrected. It stands at the center of music because it is the insecure void between past and future, the void of choice. It puts the immediate human at the center, and that is frightening. It is neither perfect nor purposely imperfect because both of these have the Model at the center. Years ago art criticism snooped its way into the artists' studio behind the finished work, as an elaboration in time of the dead thing in the gallery. Free improvisation goes one step better; it says there is only the working, it is begun and finished at the same moment, it is whatever is actually happening, activity not even proclaiming its nakedness. There could be nothing more ambiguous, and resistant to consistency."

It is impossible, in my opinion, to be interested both in "end result" and "improvisation" in the same time. Nothing personal here, mr. Tomas Korber, but to be interested in "end result" means to be interested in searching the perfection, repetition, correction, to be interested in the "end", though improvised music doesn't know of such thing as "end", as understood in traditional music. Improvised music erected on the ruins of such exceeded notions: finished work, rounded, beautiful, immaculate, adorable. The only "goal" that could be put before improvised music is its accentation of the music-making process, and all frightening consequences it could bear. The only "mistake" improvised music could make is to be affraid of the mistake, to look for the "perfect product", that would eliminate all the "mistakes". Then we're left, justifiably, asking what is that that is so exciting in improvised music ? Where's that "wisdom of the impulse", if the wisdom is pre-determined before the actual playing, and not formed during the playing itself ? Where's that "impulse" and what is it by now, if that impulse isn't achieved thru the process itself ? What kind of impulse we're talking about ? Evan Parker's impulse ? John Zorn's impulse ? Wynton Marsalis' impulse ? Kenny G's impulse ?

What's so appealing in improvised music is the fact that this music counts only (and nothing but) - working itself. Dynamic development, aware development that feeds on process, that's left lifeless and exhausted without that process, without that risk it is being both begun and finished in the same moment.
And I see not so small initiative even in the contemporary improvisation that could lead to the "professionalization" of the improvised music (consolidation of more/less stable language), which is exactly what it raised against on the turn of the century. But that's pretty normal, every advanced artistic movement eventually split up, those are just centrifugal and centripetal forces at work.

All this possessiveness about music is misguided, IMO. There's nothing "free" about that.

Just to be clear Darko, I personally have no intention of bashing you in any way. I don't think that comment was really directed at me but I thought I'd state that anyway. Furthermore, even if I may not agree with alot of what you write I still admire your conviction. It's much stronger than my own.

That being said, this thread has really strayed so far off the beaten path that I don't really know if there's any point in me steering it back. However, if we could revisit ErstPop for a moment. I appreciate your beliefs re: contemporary improv and your desire to distance yourself from eai as a moniker but to my ears, based on the magic ID samples, ErstPop isn't improv. This is where eai and improv diverge for me. This music simply integrates elements inherent in eai with elements inherent in pop.

I'm still sticking with eai a signifier. To me, it represents a broad range of music sprouting from the same structure. Whereas you prefer to stick with the "radical" improvised quota I'm happy to frolic between the poles, humming merrily to myself. It can be all electronic, it can be all acoustic and it doesn't have to be improvised. That's the beauty(and perhaps the irony) of eai. It's so gloriously inappropriately named. Lescalleet's "The Pilgrim" was my favourite album last year. That 70minute track seemed pretty dang composed. I still fell in love with it. I still call it eai. I'll probably be one of those stubborn bastards who will insist on calling it eai even if an adequate name is somehow found.

People talking about "philosophical foundatations", "things foreign to eai", "inherently unmixable", "surpassed elements" and even "freedom", etc. would really benifit by reading some Wittgenstein. Start with the biografy by Monk, then maybe the excellent book "Wittgensteins Poker", then the last section of the Tractatus, then Philosophical Investigations and then the letters.

Such prescriptive utterings are really nothing more than language delusions. It's just babbling, to fill the passing of time, to give oneself a sense of intellect, morality, seriousness, etc. Nothing against it all, but I can't take it serious anymore. I could again point out the numerous logical faults some make, but in the end, that would be just water under the bridge.

Things that can be said, can be said clearly.


As in :
hurray for Erstwhile, hurray for music!

or do you really judge art according to those templates (i.e. "the swiss") .

I've never used that term in my life, nor would I group disparate musicians crudely by nationality

and it's some ideas that the musicians in question share and around which they gather, apparently, that are problematic to me.

yes, well that's exactly what i mean. the thinking about music of some of those people are very different from each other. there are overlappings, of course, but really not as much.

i'd like tomas to point me to my disrespectful comments

i won't get into this any further. it's just a general feeling i get from your posts. but i might be wrong.

It is impossible, in my opinion, to be interested both in "end result" and "improvisation" in the same time.

...and that whole paragraph. we couldn't disagree more. so i guess it's just best to leave it at that.

i'm not interested at all in getting into this kind of discussion. my only point was that you shouldn't generalize in the ways you've done that before, obviosuly knowing very little about the work and/or ideas of those musicians.

that's all i had to say, and besides we've hijacked this thread more than enough. so let's stop here. at least i will.

on topic: i look forward to both records in question (magic I.D. and schnee) though i'm generally skeptic about this subseries and wouldn't be suprised if it got stuck after 3-4 releases, simply out of lack of appropiate material.

Such prescriptive utterings are really nothing more than language delusions. It's just babbling, to fill the passing of time, to give oneself a sense of intellect, morality, seriousness, etc. Nothing against it all, but I can't take it serious anymore.

I agree 100%.

FutureNow strikes me as the kind of guy who stands in the crowd at a gig and talks over the music. I understand where he's coming from but I just find the intense over-analysis to be deeply depressing, I'm afraid.