Critics

[faster]

Spurred by the news on here that The Wire now categorize "electroacoustic improvisation" (not "eai" apparently) as "Outer Limits" rather than "Jazz and Improvisation," I've been thinking a little about the state of criticism in improvised music. I'd like to know people's thoughts on specific critics (even identifying who all is writing about this kind of music would be useful), on the state of criticism, perceived weaknesses and strengths, preferences, etc.

It may be a little tough to be specific since so many writers read or lurk here, but I can't help thinking discussion of critics should be part of the dialog.

Dan Warburton is a critic/practitioner who covers a lot of ground on Paris Transatlantic & The Wire, Richard Pinnell is a superfan-turned-labelboss/occasional critic at Bagatellen and his own blog, Brian Olewnick writes about a very specific area of music for Bagatellen and his own blog (although he's on semi-sabbatical to make headway on his Keith Rowe biography), our own Hatta (another practitioner/critic) writes long descriptive reviews here and his blog, Joe Panzner doesn't seem to write anymore (busy with school I think?), Jason Bivins still has stuff in Dusted sometimes (right?), Nick Cain at The Wire, um, who else? Who's doing what? What do they do well? There are so few people paying close attention to this stuff--is that healthy? Why is it? What's missing (if anything)?

[Dan Warburton]

.

[J.F.]

I never met the guy in person, but alone for his music-journalistic attempts, I really miss Peter Niklas Wilson over here.


On a more general level (not covering what has been suggested in the o.p.):
I more and more get aware that this local scene here really could use a (concert) critic or two - no matter if that competent or not, as long as devoted to mirroing stuff in the local media. Too many music events here take place only in the conscience basically of the people who plan and attend them, which gets kinda frustrating over time; and it doesn't help with funds either (yes, I heard a rumor that music writers spotted at local gigs are asked for autographs by the musicians )

- that's a slightly different take on critics, and I suppose kinda exemplary for what's going on (and what's not going on) in many provincial cities.

[gohleekwang]

sorry for my bad english, before i post anything can i ask is there a different between critic, review, comment?

[kcorcoran]

Each of these albums deserves more, and many deserve whole essays in their own right (The Room, the MIMEO sight..).

Maybe future issues of Paris Transatlantic should concentrate more on that - fewer discs covered, longer reviews. I appreciate your feedback on this.

I agree with this quite a bit, and I think it harks back to earlier mention from Jon of the amount of writing documenting the current activity in Tokyo compared to the occasional print blurb which surfaces elsewhere.
With EAI and with site-based work, I think many discs would hold up to much longer reviews.

One of the first things I do when a new disc arrives in the mail is check out the packaging to discover if there is information offered. Oftentimes with EAI (and more disappointing with field-recording/site based discs) there is no writing with the disc. Actually I expect it that way. I understand the concept of letting improvisation be improvisation, or sound be sound, but I think the details of meeting and recording or seeking and studying can illuminate much about the content, and are to me at least, very enjoyable to read. With the ease of communication between fan/writer/performer, and with those boundaries being often blurred in this area, discs could remain explanation-free while the details could be relayed into critical reviews later, providing a richer overview of subjective critique, comments from those involved on the material and relationship of the players, circumstances, etc... Many of us here are unsatisfied with the dry academic accounts and the brief overarching accounts, and this idea of a writer who has been following the activity closely for some time compiling deeper-reaching reviews and writeups might remedy that. Basically, as mentioned, what is done already on IHM and respective blogs.

A nice variation on this is the interview, which I enjoy about PT and IMJ. With improv, we are looking generally at either the critical or incidental approach of the performer, which then translates well to conversation and can again offer a lot of insight to their work, even without subjecting a specific release to scrutiny.

This is something I've been thinking about more and more the past couple years, good topic to start.

[Alastair]

Brian Marley is another name to add to the list.

[Dan Warburton]

.

[William Hutson]

you should have caught me a month ago when i was still a wire hater... but byron coley wrote a review of my new release in the size matters column and i'm all smiles now.

who writes taomud.blogspot.com? has somebody mentioned that guy? or has that site even been updated in 2008? there's another guy, bill meyers, writing eai reviews for dusted now. and there used to be a guy who wrote for fakejazz before it turned into a stupid free for all. don't remember his name.

[gohleekwang]

thanks Dan, bookmarked the site

how about the journalists for french zine ""Revue & Corrigée"" and ""ImproJazz""? and how they categorized EAI?

[grisha]

and there used to be a guy who wrote for fakejazz before it turned into a stupid free for all. don't remember his name.

you mean Gil Gershman, i assume? he used to post here too, once. one of the few people whose writing i liked, but yeah, he doesn't write anymore. i also enjoyed Joe Panzner's writing, and Joe mentioned him here, but i'll also add Mike Shiflet and Ed Howard, who too were writing for Stylus. Dom Leone also did a pretty good job when he was reviewing Ersts for Pitchfork.

Massimo Ricci? i can't stand his writing, to be honest. can't take anything from it. is he capable of any kind of insight at all? and for christ's sake, is there anything this guy doesn't like (of the stuff he writes about)?

currently, though, i'd rather take a recommendation from a chosen few forum members, whom i've known for several years, and whose taste i know well, and know how it compares to mine. i rarely feel that any of criticism i read offers some extra insight that i otherwise wouldn't obtain. it would be certainly nice to see more "at length" writing, rather than just people trying to tell me what's good and what isn't in 100 words.

[Alastair]

who writes taomud.blogspot.com? has somebody mentioned that guy? or has that site even been updated in 2008?

Melbourne's own Sound Plague, ihmer.

[Richard Pinnell]

Brian Marley is another name to add to the list.

Yes, should have included him in the list above. But he's been pretty quiet of late too.. come back, Brian! ("Welease Bwian!")

Brian is still writing quite a bit, but over at Signal to Noise these days. I believe he has stopped working for The Wire, at least for now.

[Dan Warburton]

.

[Richard Pinnell]

Maybe future issues of Paris Transatlantic should concentrate more on that - fewer discs covered, longer reviews. I appreciate your feedback on this.

yes yes yes Dan, as we just discussed by email!!

I write very little compared to many of the names mentioned here simply because I don't have the time, but my last few efforts have been conscious attempts to write longer, better researched pieces. I don't think anyone really pays attention to a couple of hundred words in the back of The Wire these days, (I certainly do not ever see the slightest lift in Cathnor sales after a review there) and I'd rather take the time and space that the internet offers to write more detailed and hopefully better reviews. If its just a few throwaway descriptive lines that people want then they can always be put into an IHM thread, which serves as a much better vehicle for that kind of informal writing anyway.

[jon abbey]

oh, man. this is a subject I've studied pretty seriously over the last ten years, so quite a bit to add when I have some time later today.

in the meantime, one name that hasn't been mentioned is Steve Smith, who was a very close observer of this scene up until his dual jobs as classical critic for the NY Times and editor of the music section at Time Out New York made that impossible. we definitely miss him, hopefully he'll be back at some point.

[Cornelis]

Yeah, I also feel like I have a million thing to say

But just a quick response, and to avoid a premature rant in a secondary language, (!) I ask myself, what would be an ideal situation?

maybe this:
Having a review, whereby the reviewer has developed a relationship with the subject after numerous listenings/investigation. And have an opertunity (as with Bagatellen or IHM) to respond and keep that as part of the review, to add views, experiences and other visions etc. Benefitial for both sides.

Well let me tel you, in Holland, I would be surprised if a reviewer for the local papers has listened to the “subject” more than once (!). One can feel the home situation coming through in the review (what they listened before, what they’re general state of grumpiness or hapyness/forgivness is at that very afternoon, what the wheather was like etc)

Also,
Part of the problem is that musicians take things too personaly. If a reviewer says, my produkt is bad, (s)he doesnt say I (!) am bad. And visa versa, I can still like someone that doesn’t like my music. And I think a lot of this is is caused by not taking enough time for something. But on the other hand, how can you take time with so much stuff (+rubish) coming out?

for now
great subject btw

Cor

[Richard Pinnell]

Having a review, whereby the reviewer has developed a relationship with the subject after numerous listenings/investigation. And have an opertunity (as with Bagatellen or IHM) to respond and keep that as part of the review, to add views, experiences and other visions etc. Benefitial for both sides.

Yes this would be ideal. Of course, all too often the opportunity for comments and discussion on the writing at hand merely results in bad tempered slanging matches but such is life.

Well let me tel you, in Holland, I would be surprised if a reviewer for the local papers has listened to the “subject” more than once (!). One can feel the home situation coming through in the review (what they listened before, what they’re general state of grumpiness or hapyness/forgivness is at that very afternoon, what the wheather was like etc)

Well I'm just impressed that you have local papers even faintly interested in this music! Nothing ever appears here, though I dread to think what it would be like if it did!

Also,
Part of the problem is that musicians take things too personaly. If a reviewer says, my produkt is bad, (s)he doesnt say I (!) am bad. And visa versa, I can still like someone that doesn’t like my music. And I think a lot of this is is caused by not taking enough time for something.

Agreed

But on the other hand, how can you take time with so much stuff (+rubish) coming out?

This is a problem, but it really isn't a difficult one to overcome. Once a decision is made that something seems interesting enough to write about it really isn't difficult to dedicate what time you have to understanding the music better, be that merely through extended listening or getting in touch with the musicians involved. The problem is that for sites like PT, where Dan has attempted in the past to provide a brief overview of everything there isn't the time for just a few people to cover everything in detail. Vital and Touching Extremes lean this way as well. At its worst you end up of a stream of short pieces that just rehash the press release sent out by the label and for me that kind of site only really serves as a list of recent releases. Dan's skill as a writer and editor manages to keep PT away from this kind of thing, but its a lot of effort that I think will be better used up on fewer, longer articles.

The problem with only writing longer reviews is that the writer will lean towards music he enjoys or is interested in. This is certainly the case with me. There's no way I am going to sit and listen to something I don't like fifteen or twnety times and then email the musician to discuss how much I don't like their music! Therefore you are likely to get less negative reviews appearing, but that's where IHM comes in and a brief few lines in the right thread will suffice.

[Dan Warburton]

.

[jon abbey]

I don't even think the full page ones make a difference, at least in my experience.

[bedouin]

...There are so few people paying close attention to this stuff--is that healthy?

No (IMO)

Why is it?

I thought this is how you (the musicians reading this board) want it to be.

I mean do you care for the wider appeal?
(it's interesting to read Dan's questions 2 posts up) But what do you expect from that review? Sales? Widening your audience? Feeding your ego? Building on your ideas for your next release? Would you really care? Do you have any expectations?

What's missing (if anything)?

hmm,
Marketing = Awareness

It may sound like an anathema, but from where I stand I know there are countless of people that given the right context would appreciate the introduction to this art. And I am thinking of anything from Sugimoto, Stangl to Kai F., Krebs and our own Cor F. here. If nothing else, this stuff is contemporary and interesting and that can go far. (And after all VU didn't become a world wide thing just on the back of a few chord changes on heroin).