State of Improvisation 2010

[jon abbey]

and to maybe take a shot at Kevin's question, I think the connection between Keith's music and painting is pretty obvious to anyone who's ever seen him live. his body language is consistently that of someone with a canvas in front of him (the canvas being the room), someone who knows that any sound (color) that he adds cannot be taken back.

maybe the answer to that is that most or all 'exmus' musicians think like that, but both myself and Keith (I think) would respectfully disagree. it's the whole "knowing the value of a note" thing, which I associate with Keith saying about John Tilbury but I know goes back farther (Feldman? not sure).

[niwi]

I'm, personally, sick to death of people trying to link music to painting or any art to any other art.

i don't expect anyone else to see it quite the way i do and i'm sure if before i'd started making music i'd been an architect or a stockbroker or a juggler i'd find parallels with those activities and working methodologies and those i employ in music as well. i do find it hard to understand how people don't see any relationship between visual art (and more specifically still, abstract art) and music, though, especially anyone who's ever used or created a graphical score.

[fuzzycotton]

could you expand on this?

Is there anything to expand on? Its a tautology, no? Like saying water is wet.

I wanted to know why or how he thinks other perspectives will be valuable in handling specifically sound and texture. Merely curious is all.

[rainey]

I'm not trying to ban the topic. I completely understand an individual artist's relationship with other aspects of thought. I, personally, am extremely interested in narrative and ethics as they relate to music and, more specifically, improvising. But I'm not about to tell someone that he should spend more time listening and being ethical. And I think it should be somewhat clear that I'm responding to this general idea that knowing (and not necessarily making) more art makes one a better musician (especially when "art" is basically another word for "painting"). Keith, Vanessa, Richard Chartier, etc, have completely valid, personal relationships with painting and music, enough so that their processes/experiences blend together and inform one another. But, this story is one of many, and its apparent privilege is my problem with its frequent repetition and, more specifically, its expression via Damon in this thread.

i do find it hard to understand how people don't see any relationship between visual art (and more specifically still, abstract art) and music, though, especially anyone who's ever used or created a graphical score.

Who doesn't see this relationship? I see it. It's very difficult not to see it. Like I said, we're humans, we make connections.

Still, I don't have a very high regard for graphic scores.

[fuzzycotton]

[quote="Damon_Smith"]Yeah, but I don't really care if you or anyone else sees the similarity between Rowe's music and visual art. His music is put out there open ended and if it is easier for you to deal with purely as sound or music then go ahead and enjoy it that way.

i close my eyes and listen to Keith Rowe and all sorts of wonderful images pop into my mind. Out of curiosity, do you think that Keith's music contrasts sharply with his painting work?

I can walk over to the Rothko Chappel and Feldman and Rowe's music come to mind. Maybe it was the connection was placed there by liner notes, who knows?

I was there once and I didn't have anyone's music in mind. But now if I went I might be reminded of Shutter island.

[aditi]

I'm, personally, sick to death of people trying to link music to painting or any art to any other art.

I don't understand why there should be no link? Before hearing a piece of music, a listener purchasing a CD or record will see the cover art. Whether the cover is of a painterly or solely typographical nature, it doesn't matter. The image was selected for a reason in order to resonate with the musical piece and that image will forever be associated with that piece of music.

To bring this back to improvisation, I will relate a personal tale of painting with improvisational techniques. To create one improvisational album, I kept a journal solely for use while recording. After recording one 5 or 10 or 20 minute section, I would listen back to it and paint based on what I heard. I would then take this image and make a completely new improvisational recording based on my impressions of what I observed from the painting. This would in turn lead to new paintings. So on, and so on...These paintings were not graphical scores, just impression based pieces. For this project, the paintings were absolutely necessary for the completion of the project.

To bring this back to 2010 improvisation, I will probably use that technique again before the end of this year.

[rainey]

The image was selected for a reason in order to resonate with the musical piece and that image will forever be associated with that piece of music.

Is the image the only extra-musical component that will resonate with the listener? I'll answer that: no.

[niwi]

The image was selected for a reason in order to resonate with the musical piece and that image will forever be associated with that piece of music.

Is the image the only extra-musical component that will resonate with the listener? I'll answer that: no.

it's one of the main ones that the musician has control over, though. i mean, the artist can't help it if you deflower your girlfriend listening to their record, or first hear it when you're going through a messy divorce, but they can pick what's on the cover.

[aditi]

Is the image the only extra-musical component that will resonate with the listener? I'll answer that: no.

It is integral as a concise, visual representation of a piece. The only extra-musical component? Of course not!

[rainey]

So, are we talking about art, or design? Or marketing? Are we talking about music-making, methodology, retail, or what?

I'm talking about little myths that we make up to help understand and bear the world and that may also help fuel our music-making. And I'm saying that the painting/music discussion doesn't have a lot of fruit left in it aside from illuminating some individual artists' methods.

Please continue to enjoy paintings and music and friends and foodstuffs and let them populate each other to your heart's content.

It is integral as a concise, visual representation of a piece.

It is not integral. See: radio. Nor does it always or even often represent a piece.

[jkudler]

and to maybe take a shot at Kevin's question, I think the connection between Keith's music and painting is pretty obvious to anyone who's ever seen him live. his body language is consistently that of someone with a canvas in front of him (the canvas being the room), someone who knows that any sound (color) that he adds cannot be taken .

Not obvious to me at all. I'm aware of his concurrent interest from interviews and such, but it never once occurred to me that it's been manifested in his body language.

-J.

[fuzzycotton]

and to maybe take a shot at Kevin's question, I think the connection between Keith's music and painting is pretty obvious to anyone who's ever seen him live. his body language is consistently that of someone with a canvas in front of him (the canvas being the room), someone who knows that any sound (color) that he adds cannot be taken .

Not obvious to me at all. I'm aware of his concurrent interest from interviews and such, but it never once occurred to me that it's been manifested in his body language.

-J.

i don't think I've ever witnessed a painter in front of a canvas so I wouldn't know what their body language would look like.

[Damon_Smith]

I wouldn't mind splitting the thread or adding the music/painting posts to an existing thread. I think the beauty of abstract material of all kinds is the material doesn't tell you how to experience it.

I could expand on how my work or even how my perceptions of others work relates to art or whatever, but everyone's experience with the work is valid.

[jkudler]

Most improvising musicians I know are pretty conversant with contemporary visual art. I don't know anything like as many visual artists, but my impression is that the converse isn't really the case. A lot of artists talk about listening to music while they work, but they generally don't mean listening to the music that gets discussed here. Or is that a mistaken impression?

I think it's enormously hard to say. Are musicians really that aware of *contemporary* visual art? What I see mentioned here is twombly, Rothko, etc. The equivalent music would be maybe cage and orrnette Coleman. I think many visual artists are aware of these major movements, but the music discussed here remains *very* obscure. It's probably also worth mentioning that the art world, while clearly full of a tremendous amount of bullshit, remains more friendly to experimental or "new" work than either the popular or high art music worlds.

-J.

[Alastair]

Chiming in very late, I know, but I'm wary of becoming part of a Hollow Earth Recording against my will

Bhob's point about there not necessarily being a link between an image (CD cover, etc) and a piece of music mediated by the artist covers not only radio, but most downloads via slsk and torrents I'd say.

I also am a bit sick of people linking music with fine art. I don't deny that some musicians feel that link, but sometimes it feels to me that people are trying to give their music legitimacy by connecting it with a more accepted artform/artwork. If obscure (to the wider world) 21 Century eai musicians were linking their art to 21 Century obscure (to the wider world) visual artists, there might be valid links. But if someone else goes on about Rothko and Barnett Newman in relation to slabs of sound, canvasses on which to paint notes etc again, hand me my laudanum.

And Exmus sounds too like "Xmas" for my liking, Jon. Or "SuBo" or "Bennifer" or any of those shortened terms for "celebrities" that thick people find so amusing to use.

[faster]

Chiming in very late, I know, but I'm wary of becoming part of a Hollow Earth Recording against my will

Likewise.

Bhob's point about there not necessarily being a link between an image (CD cover, etc) and a piece of music mediated by the artist covers not only radio, but most downloads via slsk and torrents I'd say.

I also am a bit sick of people linking music with fine art. I don't deny that some musicians feel that link, but sometimes it feels to me that people are trying to give their music legitimacy by connecting it with a more accepted artform/artwork. If obscure (to the wider world) 21 Century eai musicians were linking their art to 21 Century obscure (to the wider world) visual artists, there might be valid links. But if someone else goes on about Rothko and Barnett Newman in relation to slabs of sound, canvasses on which to paint notes etc again, hand me my laudanum.

And Exmus sounds too like "Xmas" for my liking, Jon. Or "SuBo" or "Bennifer" or any of those shortened terms for "celebrities" that thick people find so amusing to use.

Well said.

[jon abbey]

i don't think I've ever witnessed a painter in front of a canvas so I wouldn't know what their body language would look like.

I highly recommend checking out Clouzot's 'The Mystery of Picasso':

http://www.amazon.com/Mystery-Picasso-P ... 047&sr=8-2

[kp*]

I could expand on how my work or even how my perceptions of others work relates to art or whatever, but everyone's experience with the work is valid.

Kind of a copout man. I didn't ask you to validate or invalidate anyone's experience. I asked you to explain your own statements, to elucidate certain fluffy pronouncements you made about space and texture in visual art and in Rowe's music. I was hoping you would clarify by giving more concrete connections possibly rooted in the actual fabric of the sounding music.

Of course you don't have to do anything of the like but to say it is not worthwhile to flesh out these fuzzy notions because everyone's experience with the music at hand is valid is just a show stopper. It's a conversational abortion. Of course everyone's experience of the music is valid (that pronouncement is right up right up there with "Other perspectives beyond music are really going to be extremely valuable") that doesn't answer any of the questions at hand. Why be in the conversation at all then?

You could end pretty much crush every conversation like that. "I could talk more about why i think 12 tone music is a dead end and not rooted in the realities of cognition or acoustics, but you know EVERYONE's experience of the music is valid."

But then we would never explore anything, learn anything new, or open some minds would we? The whole point of this IHM thing is discussion isn't it?

You said something you obviously believe strongly in. Maybe it is a gut feeling you can't articulate any better than you already have, than say that or just try. Otherwise when people say things like "pass me my top hat and monocle, say dear boy, Webern's op. 27 is is much like an organic soufflé don't you agree?" or "Proust was a composer with words man WORDS!!" I am just gonna call them on it. It may be true and brilliant. It might also be arty twaddle and when musicians start throwing vague ideas abou art around (especially if it sounds like they have a smoking jacket, a brandy and one of those long cigarette filters in their hands when they are saying it) my BS meter starts twitching. It is not always BS in the end. But it's been primed to do so by a veritable storm of bullshit by inarticulate flighty self important composers (try academia some time, it's not pretty).

-kp--

[fuzzycotton]

I think the beauty of abstract material of all kinds is the material doesn't tell you how to experience it.

this has got me wondering, and I hope I don't sound too much like a newb but could the general consensus amongst members of this board be that the music most often discussed here is considered abstract? I've been doing some improvised electronic music for a couple of years now and I guess if I played it for my mom she would think it was abstract but I never really considered what I'm doing as abstract, terrible wank sometimes yes but not necessarily abstract. So, a naive question...Is the music of Keith Rowe,Taku Sugimoto or Nmperign abstract?

[fuzzycotton]

i don't think I've ever witnessed a painter in front of a canvas so I wouldn't know what their body language would look like.

I highly recommend checking out Clouzot's 'The Mystery of Picasso':

http://www.amazon.com/Mystery-Picasso-P ... 047&sr=8-2

Thank you very much, I was not aware of this, looks very interesting.