Day 29 – Jeph Jerman – Sound in Rooms KCMU Seattle 05.09.98, WFMU New Jersey 07.20.04 CDR
Here we have yet another great example of Jeph Jerman’s skill as an improvisor, taking objects from nature and producing sounds from them with a deftness of touch and an ear for detail to rival anyone. Yet he goes about his way on these recordings in an understated manner, often allowing the objects he is playing to dictate their own sounds, allowing gravity to play its part as heavy objects rock on their axis, and the element of chance to dictate how handfuls of stones and shells rubbed together will sound.
These tracks come from two radio broadcasts. The first dating from 1998 is from a Washington University radio station and the second was recorded six years later for WFMU, an interesting looking arts station in New Jersey. At one point at the start of a track a snippet of a DY is heard for a brief moment. I’m not sure if this was left in deliberately for a reason, or merely because it doesn’t actually matter that it is there.
The music on all nine pieces is generally on the quiet side here. Track five contains the best use of the ‘Branch swished through the air’ technique I have heard, used here with a good sense of precision and with the sound made adjusted by throwing the branch through the air at different speeds. Track six features the agitated objects mentioned above that are closely recorded vibrating slowly to a halt as they come to rest. The cumulative effect here is of deep and obvious echo treatments being applied to the sounds, but there are no artificial effects used here.
The ninth and last track here is particularly enjoyable, lasting twenty three minutes it is possibly the entire recording from the New Jersey broadcast. Whilst much of the method used here to create music and the raw materials involved may not have changed six years after the first pieces, there is a tightness and confidence that can be heard in the presentation of the sounds. Jerman focusses mainly on rustling and scraping together a collection of the usual items, stones, wood and shells, beginning in quite a sparse manner, but later building into a louder and denser rattle of some force. Near the end of the track the sounds move gradually towards the wooden objects until with five minutes remaining there is just a storm of tiny wooden clatter. This last track is easily the stand out piece on the CD.
I am probably failing my ears by saying there is little in this disc I have not discussed before, it is hard to find new ways of describing Jerman’s intimate involvement with nature and his manner of making music. However whilst my listening abilities and more importantly my failings as a writer struggle to relay the enjoyment of listening to this disc tonight, I can assure you it is amongst the best examples of Jerman’s solo improvisation, with the last track itself worth the entrance fee alone.
One month with Jeph Jerman
-
Richard Pinnell
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:12 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, England
- Contact:
-
Richard Pinnell
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:12 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, England
- Contact:
Greg / Ruminates,
Thank you both for enlightening me a little on the Cage / I Ching connections. As I said, my knowledge of the I Ching is slightly less than minimal. I will also seek out those pieces by Cage Greg, I was not aware of them.
Ruminates, I hope I have been making recommendations as I go along, and I doubt I will be listing any rankings as such, seems a pointless exercise.
I have however, a vague plan to write a piece about how this entire experience has been for me and what I have learned from it, possibly for Bagatellen, but we shall see, time is pretty pressing for me at the moment.
Thank you both for enlightening me a little on the Cage / I Ching connections. As I said, my knowledge of the I Ching is slightly less than minimal. I will also seek out those pieces by Cage Greg, I was not aware of them.
Ruminates, I hope I have been making recommendations as I go along, and I doubt I will be listing any rankings as such, seems a pointless exercise.
I have however, a vague plan to write a piece about how this entire experience has been for me and what I have learned from it, possibly for Bagatellen, but we shall see, time is pretty pressing for me at the moment.
there is a lot of human input involved in listening.Richard Pinnell wrote:It could also be argued that there is a lot of human input involved with a recording such as Grackles. The decisions about what to record, how to edit, and the effect that the recording process has on the sound itself all add up to create a piece of music selected for presentation rather than a purely natural experience.
-
user_183
Fair enough, you've worked plenty anyway--I'll have to dig through these to figure out which ones I can afford. Inspired by your project, I've listened to The Second Attention (my only Jeph) multiple times every day since Wednesday, and I haven't eaten or taken a shower.Richard Pinnell wrote:
Ruminates, I hope I have been making recommendations as I go along, and I doubt I will be listing any rankings as such, seems a pointless exercise.
-
user_183
It's clear that you've already written A LOT on this music and plenty of wonderful threads have been initated. One more issue I'd like to see reflected upon is the choice of listening to field recordings/environmental improvisation on headphones while outside or with other people instead of hearing whatever happens to be out there, alongside others and while it is actually happening. This seems to tangle up some of the philosophies that I perceive govern JJ's creations. All approaches, needless to say, are valid and sometimes I need headphones on my way to work. Maybe one question is: is Jeph the best aural antidote to your sonic environment?Richard Pinnell wrote: I have however, a vague plan to write a piece about how this entire experience has been for me and what I have learned from it
-
Richard Pinnell
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:12 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, England
- Contact:
Ruminates, I am pleased you have found some worth in this project. One of my hopes for this is that it would spark some discussion on related subjects, and that others could become involved in this listening experience. So on that point, why don't you take the Second Attention with you out as you suggest and see what happens?
I would be genuinely interested to hear what other people have to offer as part of their own listening experience and the points you consider above are all very interesting, so why not?
I would be genuinely interested to hear what other people have to offer as part of their own listening experience and the points you consider above are all very interesting, so why not?
-
Richard Pinnell
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:12 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, England
- Contact:
Day 30 – Jeph Jerman – Mam – a – gah
(Track from the compilation The Sound of Nature, The Nature of sound)
Kaon Ingeos CD
This eight minute piece is really quite stunningly beautiful. Taken from the rather nice Kaon compilation that features recordings from Francisco Lopez, Seth Nehil, Mnortham amongst others, Mam-a-gah is easily my favourite track on the album.
A brief google search reveals Mam–a-gah to be the name of a picnic site in the Saguaro National Park, Arizona, where this was recorded. Fading in, the music instantly reveals a hauntingly beautiful moaning wind, sounding almost artificial in its qualities, such is the clarity of the recording. This low, mournful wail resembles the chilling sound of the Second World War air raid sirens that brought London to a standstill, and creates a mental image in my head of a massive open but totally deserted space.
Just above this wavering drone sits a further sound from the wind, this time a closer, high pitched whisper as it makes its way in between objects close by. These two sounds are constant, but always changing, creating a decentred, queasy feel as they wobble a little here and there as the wind rises and falls.
The third and final element to the sound is a solitary gentle scraping of something that sounds metallic, but could just be stone or porcelain, close to the microphone but not so loud as to dominate the recording in any way. This sound flickers in and out, resembling the lid of a china teapot being seated into its place over and over. It is hard to tell if this additional element is ‘played’ as such by Jerman or if it is just something caught in the wind, but it adds the finishing touch to the ‘composition’.
This is easily the best recorded of all of Jerman’s field recordings I have heard, the sounds are vividly real and it is a great shame that the piece lasts only eight minutes. I have settled for playing Mam-a-gah many times this evening on repeat play mode, the fade in and out at the beginning and end of the piece spoiling the effect here though.
So tomorrow is the last day of October and it will feature probably Jeph Jerman’s best known release, The Second Attention. Watching the pile of discs to play go down throughout the month to be left with that single disc has presented me with mixed feelings. One part of me will be overjoyed at not having to sit and type here every evening, another part will miss the process of listening to this constantly fascinating music and trying to understand it and how it affects me in my own little way.
One thing is for sure I will continue to seek out Jerman’s music and I hope it continues to come thick and fast.
(Track from the compilation The Sound of Nature, The Nature of sound)
Kaon Ingeos CD
This eight minute piece is really quite stunningly beautiful. Taken from the rather nice Kaon compilation that features recordings from Francisco Lopez, Seth Nehil, Mnortham amongst others, Mam-a-gah is easily my favourite track on the album.
A brief google search reveals Mam–a-gah to be the name of a picnic site in the Saguaro National Park, Arizona, where this was recorded. Fading in, the music instantly reveals a hauntingly beautiful moaning wind, sounding almost artificial in its qualities, such is the clarity of the recording. This low, mournful wail resembles the chilling sound of the Second World War air raid sirens that brought London to a standstill, and creates a mental image in my head of a massive open but totally deserted space.
Just above this wavering drone sits a further sound from the wind, this time a closer, high pitched whisper as it makes its way in between objects close by. These two sounds are constant, but always changing, creating a decentred, queasy feel as they wobble a little here and there as the wind rises and falls.
The third and final element to the sound is a solitary gentle scraping of something that sounds metallic, but could just be stone or porcelain, close to the microphone but not so loud as to dominate the recording in any way. This sound flickers in and out, resembling the lid of a china teapot being seated into its place over and over. It is hard to tell if this additional element is ‘played’ as such by Jerman or if it is just something caught in the wind, but it adds the finishing touch to the ‘composition’.
This is easily the best recorded of all of Jerman’s field recordings I have heard, the sounds are vividly real and it is a great shame that the piece lasts only eight minutes. I have settled for playing Mam-a-gah many times this evening on repeat play mode, the fade in and out at the beginning and end of the piece spoiling the effect here though.
So tomorrow is the last day of October and it will feature probably Jeph Jerman’s best known release, The Second Attention. Watching the pile of discs to play go down throughout the month to be left with that single disc has presented me with mixed feelings. One part of me will be overjoyed at not having to sit and type here every evening, another part will miss the process of listening to this constantly fascinating music and trying to understand it and how it affects me in my own little way.
One thing is for sure I will continue to seek out Jerman’s music and I hope it continues to come thick and fast.
-
user_827
-
Brian Olewnick
- Posts: 287
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 12:14 pm
-
user_350
jon said - "no, that's not what I said. your original statement was the one I disagreed with, this second post is weakening your original stance a bit."
my original stance was that the sounds of nature (non-intentional to humans) can be AS powerful and moving and beautiful, etc AS the sounds that humans make (intentional to humans). i didnt say one was better than the other. i wasnt making an absolute value judgement. i like both and both kinds of music/sounds are powerful and moving and meaningful to me. so if i wasnt clear before, i hope i am now.
jon said - "my position is that the best music created by humans is far more powerful to me than the best music created by nature, in my experience. it's not that natural sounds can't be beautiful in and of themselves, they can."
again, you are saying here that you need human involvement / construction/composition to make a powerful piece of music for you. i disagree with this. i dont think there needs to be human involvement for music/sound to be moving and powerful. maybe we are disagreeing on the definition of music here? i guess my idea of what music is encompasses all sounds and extends beyond intentional music (humans organizing sound in space and time). jon, do you need tension/release or climax/resolution for music to be poweful? do you need a major scale to make you feel happy?
as i said before, i think that music/sound does not contain emotion by itself. the emotions lie within the listeners. we all bring our own different human experience when listening. so how is it possible that a certain sound (or collection of sounds) could make everyone feel the same way? i think this is impossible and also shows that the emotions come from within the listeners and not from the sounds themselves.
jon said - "I also don't think that the listener has to necessarily grasp the specific emotion that the composer/musician has in mind for the music to be extremely powerful"
exactly, this is my point. the listener finds their own personal connection with the music. and has their own personal emotional response to it based on their own personal human experience. the emotion lies within the listener, regardless of what the composer intended. has a stereotypically 'sad' piece of music ever made you happy? or vice versa.
jon said - "I don't quite understand how you can feel this way and continue to make music yourself. what's the point? why not just encourage people to listen to their surroundings more?"
its quite easy for me to still make music. now that the universe of sound is wide open there are so many possibilities and ideas and things to be done. i dont tell people how to feel about my music. i dont claim or try to push my emotions onto people. i would hope that the people that enjoy my music can come to it and have their own set of experiences with it. have their own emotional response to it (or none at all). now you may hear my music and say that a certain piece sounds overtly sad or happy or joyful or sleepy or anything, but again this is the listener reading into the music and projecting stereotypes about those emotions. i dont have a specific intention about how i want people to feel or react to my music. it is a very personal music to me. and is very moving and emotional for ME. but i dont expect anyone else to feel the same things as me when they hear my music. and i hope that some of my music does help people open up their listening and enjoy the sounds of their surroundings more. and recognize that there is music all around us. all the time. but again i cant expect this to happen to everyone or anyone.
and to reiterate, intentional music and non-intentional music are both totally valid. they are just different ways of organizing sound in time. and i was saying that either type of music/sound is and can be very powerful and moving for me.
each sound is the center of the universe.
let us listen right now.
-gd
my original stance was that the sounds of nature (non-intentional to humans) can be AS powerful and moving and beautiful, etc AS the sounds that humans make (intentional to humans). i didnt say one was better than the other. i wasnt making an absolute value judgement. i like both and both kinds of music/sounds are powerful and moving and meaningful to me. so if i wasnt clear before, i hope i am now.
jon said - "my position is that the best music created by humans is far more powerful to me than the best music created by nature, in my experience. it's not that natural sounds can't be beautiful in and of themselves, they can."
again, you are saying here that you need human involvement / construction/composition to make a powerful piece of music for you. i disagree with this. i dont think there needs to be human involvement for music/sound to be moving and powerful. maybe we are disagreeing on the definition of music here? i guess my idea of what music is encompasses all sounds and extends beyond intentional music (humans organizing sound in space and time). jon, do you need tension/release or climax/resolution for music to be poweful? do you need a major scale to make you feel happy?
as i said before, i think that music/sound does not contain emotion by itself. the emotions lie within the listeners. we all bring our own different human experience when listening. so how is it possible that a certain sound (or collection of sounds) could make everyone feel the same way? i think this is impossible and also shows that the emotions come from within the listeners and not from the sounds themselves.
jon said - "I also don't think that the listener has to necessarily grasp the specific emotion that the composer/musician has in mind for the music to be extremely powerful"
exactly, this is my point. the listener finds their own personal connection with the music. and has their own personal emotional response to it based on their own personal human experience. the emotion lies within the listener, regardless of what the composer intended. has a stereotypically 'sad' piece of music ever made you happy? or vice versa.
jon said - "I don't quite understand how you can feel this way and continue to make music yourself. what's the point? why not just encourage people to listen to their surroundings more?"
its quite easy for me to still make music. now that the universe of sound is wide open there are so many possibilities and ideas and things to be done. i dont tell people how to feel about my music. i dont claim or try to push my emotions onto people. i would hope that the people that enjoy my music can come to it and have their own set of experiences with it. have their own emotional response to it (or none at all). now you may hear my music and say that a certain piece sounds overtly sad or happy or joyful or sleepy or anything, but again this is the listener reading into the music and projecting stereotypes about those emotions. i dont have a specific intention about how i want people to feel or react to my music. it is a very personal music to me. and is very moving and emotional for ME. but i dont expect anyone else to feel the same things as me when they hear my music. and i hope that some of my music does help people open up their listening and enjoy the sounds of their surroundings more. and recognize that there is music all around us. all the time. but again i cant expect this to happen to everyone or anyone.
and to reiterate, intentional music and non-intentional music are both totally valid. they are just different ways of organizing sound in time. and i was saying that either type of music/sound is and can be very powerful and moving for me.
each sound is the center of the universe.
let us listen right now.
-gd
-
Richard Pinnell
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:12 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, England
- Contact:
With all due respect Greg, (and perhaps I shouldnt be answering for Jon here) but I don't think that is quite what he is saying there.gtd wrote: jon said - "my position is that the best music created by humans is far more powerful to me than the best music created by nature, in my experience. it's not that natural sounds can't be beautiful in and of themselves, they can."
again, you are saying here that you need human involvement / construction/composition to make a powerful piece of music for you.
He seems to me to be saying that whilst composed/improvised music and field recordings can both be beautiful in their own right, he finds the best examples of music created by humans to be more rewarding than the best of the music taken from nature.
As I outlined in my previous post, despite my intense listening experiences here, I tend to agree with this. Whilst Jerman's field recordings are far nicer things to listen to than the majority of composed/improvised musics out there, I still prefer his improvisations above them.
I don't think Jon was dismissing the field recording genre in any way, or suggesting it did not contain powerful content, just stating his personal preference for music originating in the mind of human beings.
Apologies Jon, correct me if I've got you wrong.
i would have some followup questions to this then:
what is the human element/involvement that you need in music?
and is this need tied to what your preconceived notions of what music should be?
tell me what is missing in non-intentional music.
how do humans make music/sound more than what is?
why do you prefer jeph's improvisations? what is it about those pieces that makes them more rewarding than the field recordings?
also i want to make clear that i wasnt necessarily talking about field recordings in my previous posts. i was talking about listening to nature or listening to the world around you. i think the act of recording the sounds of nature or any other sounds (field recordings) and fixing them on to some type of media shows some compositional intention as well. because the recorder/composer has to decide what to record, how to record, when, where, how long, etc. so when i say non-intentional music/sound, im not really referring to field recordings. i hope that this is a clear distinction now.
also i never said that jon was dismissing field recordings and that they cant be rewarding or cant be moving or powerful for him. what im trying to understand here is what it is and why its more rewarding for you guys to have a human involved.
-gd
With all due respect Greg, (and perhaps I shouldnt be answering for Jon here) but I don't think that is quite what he is saying there.
what is the human element/involvement that you need in music?
and is this need tied to what your preconceived notions of what music should be?
tell me what is missing in non-intentional music.
how do humans make music/sound more than what is?
why do you prefer jeph's improvisations? what is it about those pieces that makes them more rewarding than the field recordings?
also i want to make clear that i wasnt necessarily talking about field recordings in my previous posts. i was talking about listening to nature or listening to the world around you. i think the act of recording the sounds of nature or any other sounds (field recordings) and fixing them on to some type of media shows some compositional intention as well. because the recorder/composer has to decide what to record, how to record, when, where, how long, etc. so when i say non-intentional music/sound, im not really referring to field recordings. i hope that this is a clear distinction now.
also i never said that jon was dismissing field recordings and that they cant be rewarding or cant be moving or powerful for him. what im trying to understand here is what it is and why its more rewarding for you guys to have a human involved.
-gd
With all due respect Greg, (and perhaps I shouldnt be answering for Jon here) but I don't think that is quite what he is saying there.
greg, sorry, I think I'm personally done with this discussion. I really think I said what I wanted to say already. we could go around and around, I have a slew of questions I could ask you too, but I think it's pretty clear what both of our perspectives are on this. I just didn't want to leave your original statement unchallenged.
hey jon,
fair enough. i kinda suspected that this would happen.
i felt we would end up talking in circles too and not getting anywhere.
the 'what is music?' discussion is indeed a tough one....and maybe ultimately not even worth talking about.
and you are right, i do consider all sounds to be music.
take care,
gd
fair enough. i kinda suspected that this would happen.
i felt we would end up talking in circles too and not getting anywhere.
the 'what is music?' discussion is indeed a tough one....and maybe ultimately not even worth talking about.
and you are right, i do consider all sounds to be music.
take care,
gd
jon abbey wrote:greg, sorry, I think I'm personally done with this discussion. I really think I said what I wanted to say already. we could go around and around, I have a slew of questions I could ask you too, but I think it's pretty clear what both of our perspectives are on this. I just didn't want to leave your original statement unchallenged.
-
Richard Pinnell
- Posts: 2629
- Joined: Sat May 10, 2008 6:12 pm
- Location: Oxfordshire, England
- Contact:
Day 31 – Jeph Jerman – The Second Attention Anomalous Records CD
And so to the final disc of the month, and also Jerman’s most widely known release, The Second Attention. I have a vague understanding of the Second Attention as being a shamanic theory of the human mind’s ability to transcend the mundane happenings that surround us every day, the ability to be aware of something more than what seems immediately obvious. My understanding here may be a little off the mark, but all the same this seems a good analogy for Jeph Jerman’s music.
A ‘real’ CD on the Anomalous label, I have owned this recording for a little while, and to a degree I consider it to be the ideal starting point for someone interested in hearing Jerman for the first time, as it contains elements of all of his different improvisational approaches, tying them all together in one beautifully recorded and carefully sculpted composition.
In places The Second Attention is highly musical. There is a flowing, poetic feel to the recording in places that is less obvious on other recordings. The sounds involved move through phases, from the delicate scraping of stones to bold percussive figures to virtually silent moments when all that can be heard seems to be a single drip of water. This is for me Jerman’s solo masterwork, utilising the superior recording facilities of the studio to truly capture every last intricacy of these sounds.
In general the music is sparse, allowing the charged silence in the room to play a major role, until the last moments of this last disc when I had to smile a wry smile as Jerman reintroduces the ‘branch swished through the air’ technique again to bring the recording to a resounding close.
For some reason I feel I do not need to describe this music to you now. The Second Attention is simply a fine presentation of Jeph Jerman’s remarkable ability to behold, capture and re-present beautiful sounds. Trying to fit this music into the strait jacket of language seems now the wrong thing to do. If The Second Attention is the best single representation of Jeph Jerman’s solo music then the wisest suggestion I can make is that you try and find a copy and just listen...
Between the beautiful photographs that adorn the CD booklet lie two short quotes chosen by Jerman. The first is drawn predictably from the words of John Cage, but the second, a few lines from David Bohm seemed to be an apt way to end here;
“What interferes with listening... is that thought jumps in very fast with a word and all its associations, which goes so fast that thought takes that to be direct perception”
This may be the last review of the month, but I personally feel this is the start of a new approach to how I listen to not just recordings of music, but also the world around me. I hope this series has been of some interest to at least a few readers, thanks to anyone that has followed me through to the end, I hope that maybe a few more Jerman discs have sold to a few new listeners. I plan to finalise my thoughts on this whole experience soon, perhaps in the shape of a more ‘formal’ piece at Bagatellen, and I hope to (finally) speak with Jeph as well.
For now though, I’m just hitting the Repeat button on the CD player.
And so to the final disc of the month, and also Jerman’s most widely known release, The Second Attention. I have a vague understanding of the Second Attention as being a shamanic theory of the human mind’s ability to transcend the mundane happenings that surround us every day, the ability to be aware of something more than what seems immediately obvious. My understanding here may be a little off the mark, but all the same this seems a good analogy for Jeph Jerman’s music.
A ‘real’ CD on the Anomalous label, I have owned this recording for a little while, and to a degree I consider it to be the ideal starting point for someone interested in hearing Jerman for the first time, as it contains elements of all of his different improvisational approaches, tying them all together in one beautifully recorded and carefully sculpted composition.
In places The Second Attention is highly musical. There is a flowing, poetic feel to the recording in places that is less obvious on other recordings. The sounds involved move through phases, from the delicate scraping of stones to bold percussive figures to virtually silent moments when all that can be heard seems to be a single drip of water. This is for me Jerman’s solo masterwork, utilising the superior recording facilities of the studio to truly capture every last intricacy of these sounds.
In general the music is sparse, allowing the charged silence in the room to play a major role, until the last moments of this last disc when I had to smile a wry smile as Jerman reintroduces the ‘branch swished through the air’ technique again to bring the recording to a resounding close.
For some reason I feel I do not need to describe this music to you now. The Second Attention is simply a fine presentation of Jeph Jerman’s remarkable ability to behold, capture and re-present beautiful sounds. Trying to fit this music into the strait jacket of language seems now the wrong thing to do. If The Second Attention is the best single representation of Jeph Jerman’s solo music then the wisest suggestion I can make is that you try and find a copy and just listen...
Between the beautiful photographs that adorn the CD booklet lie two short quotes chosen by Jerman. The first is drawn predictably from the words of John Cage, but the second, a few lines from David Bohm seemed to be an apt way to end here;
“What interferes with listening... is that thought jumps in very fast with a word and all its associations, which goes so fast that thought takes that to be direct perception”
This may be the last review of the month, but I personally feel this is the start of a new approach to how I listen to not just recordings of music, but also the world around me. I hope this series has been of some interest to at least a few readers, thanks to anyone that has followed me through to the end, I hope that maybe a few more Jerman discs have sold to a few new listeners. I plan to finalise my thoughts on this whole experience soon, perhaps in the shape of a more ‘formal’ piece at Bagatellen, and I hope to (finally) speak with Jeph as well.
For now though, I’m just hitting the Repeat button on the CD player.
Hey Richard a tremendous job, congratulations on making it all the way through. When you first mentioned this project in NYC I thought it would be cool if you just gave a sentence or two or even just a thumbs up or down. But your descriptions of the music, your listening and methodology have all been insightful, extensive and deep. So my hats off to you. Thanks.
"Please everybody, if we haven't done what we could have done, we've tried"
