This review was well worth waiting for! As several people have already acknowledged, on this site and elsewhere, between is hard to write about, it seems to slip out of one's conceptual grasp ("eeliness" is a perfect way to describe it).

The music is absolutely terrific, very different in many respects from Nakamura and Rowe's earlier Erst, and it shows how much their musical relationship has developed over the years.

Glad to hear you're writing a Rowe biography, Brian.

Like the sound of wet lips on tushy, so go the reviews of this record online. In your biography, you might refrain from adjectives like "delicious." I don´t know what it is but something about reviews of eai discs just make me uneasy. Maybe if I could only just "get" it.

Great review Brian, I have to say we see pretty eye to eye on this release. I've been thinking of this album in a more historical context (mostly in terms of Erstwhile releases) so I really appreciate your examination of this from the notion of 'between-ness'.

Very nice review Brian. This music is indeed incredibly hard to write about, and I think you took the right approach by tackling that "eeliness" head-on. Even after months of listening, I still don't think I've come close to getting into this music's heart. Along with another challenging double-disc from this year -- the nmperign/Lescalleet outing "Love Me Two Times" -- this is a remarkable state-of-the-music album, a clear attempt at both a summation and a twist into new directions and new ideas. It's fascinating to hear Rowe and Nakamura pushing their boundaries so aggressively.

I liked this, ultimately I have returned to "Four Gentlmen of the guitar" more often. I think put it on after the new "free Zone Appleby".
Ted, I hear you - the slavish devotion and leftover traces of the earlier hardline dogma around EAI are hard to take, still the alterative is missing out on some incredible and important music.

I like this disc. I have their earlier duo as well, which I also have enjoyed, but I was glad to hear that this wasn't simply a repeat of their first effort. I was pleasantly surprised by 13630 kHz, which dispells the critique that these guys are afraid to get dense and loud.

Brian, I can see why it is hard to "stand back" from the music, but I'm wondering why you think it is so important to do so. In my experience, this music is best enjoyed when you can really "get in". There is certainly a continuity to the music, but I find that music in general (and especially eai) fails if it goes too much for overall concept and misses the immediate details. This music may be intellectual, but I find that the eai I end up enjoying is that which gets to me an immediate visceral level.

This brings up the whole idea of Form in improvised music, which is an eely subject if there ever was one. It think the eeliness is actually part of what attracts us. Do you think you would enjoy the music as which if you could really firmly grasp it?

Ok, I admit, I sold mine to jacob.

That's by far the best summation of what is a monumental piece of music anyone's managed yet Brian, nice one.

And for the record, the extra insight and understanding into the music you may have made for a more informed, more interesting and overall far better review. :)

I have to admit, B, I'm having as much difficulty 'getting' your (very intriguing) review as I have with actually listening to 'between'.

I wasn't expecting the review to somehow unlock the secrets of 'between', but I have to admit I'm still a bit baffled with the concepts covered in it. The underlying notion seems to be about exploring the dynamics and tensions created in those spaces between one object and and another That presumably means one musician/instrument and another (to use more concrete terms). To me this is the building block of any collaboration, and it's certainly not something unexplored. I know I'm missing something here, but what is it?

Jacob, I don't think you *have* to listen to things on an intellectual as opposed to visceral level--I don't really like to distinguish between the two, truth be told--but when you have some reason to believe that at least one of the participants does indeed tend to have "extra-musical" concerns (as might Toshi although, as I mentioned in the write-up, he generally prefers not to talk about the music he makes--not so with Rowe), I feel under some amount of obligation to try to appreciate that aspect in order to (attempt to) fully understand the music. Others may not feel that obligation.

Sergio, I'll try to get back to your comments tomorrow--too tired now to think even semi-coherently....

I'm not sure what there is to get - those guys have been playing together for a while - that is what it sounds like.

I'd be curious to know why Erstwhile choose to release two doubles with these two on both back to back.
The Erstwhile forthcoming list looks interesting.

"I'd be curious to know why Erstwhile choose to release two doubles with these two on both back to back."

because this is the next one that was finished, nothing else was ready (still nothing else is totally ready, 3-4 months later). for the first time since I started doing this, I skipped catalog numbers, 4g is 046 and between is 050, and the next few will fill in the gap.

jon when might the stangl/fagashinski drop. will it be a straight improv dis? same question for the yoshida/kurzman? by striahgt improv i dont mean a totally unedited hard line defination, i just mean taken from improv, as opposed to remixes or compositions or anythign like that? just curious.

Richar Pinnell may be quite right, both that this is the best summation of this recording and that it has benefitted from Brian's intimate knowledge of the creators, but I think it may have been intended for people who already own the discs, a group that may be, with Brian, searching for keys to the kingdom. Those (like me) who haven't pulled the trigger, however, might like to know a bit about what it actually sounds like. Even the "strictly aural" paragraph with its "searching," "pure delight", "billowing into the void" and gorgeous contraction back to two individuals doesn't give this potential buyer much of a sense.

FWIW, to give a contrasting example, I really liked Brian's recent review of 'Supernatural Hot Rug and Not Used,' which I take to be almost a model of how to write reviews of abstract music (at least for people who don't have the disc). It certainly made me want to buy it, anyhow. It wasn't so "deep" maybe, but I thought it was a terrific job. I don't know what Brian's relationship(s) (if any) is/are with Olive and Nisikawa or if that review benefitted from it/them.

Thats a fair enough point Walto.

Their are other, in my opinion inferior reviews out there that do what you ask however, one can be found here;
http://www.stylusmagazine.com/reviews/keith-rowe-and-toshimaru-nakamura/between.htm

I don´t know if I´d call that review inferior. It´s a review at least. There´s a little too much "I" in this piece for me to even consider this a review. I´d call it personal commentary. And again, delicious?

Sergio--As always, it's difficult to put into words and I succumb to visual art analogies, but--there's something one does (at least, I do) involving being extremely conscious of the air around objects while looking at them or rendering them. It's a visual thing, in a sense, even though you're dealing with an invisible element (except like in the past few days in NYC, maybe). But just by being aware of the space, something that causes you (or, again, at least me) to *see* things differently, the work you produce possibly emerges differently. Depending how one is otherwise attuned, "different" may equate to "more beautiful". I think of it in terms of "more real", at least acknowledging an aspect of reality that's often overlooked and which I find beautiful. I think you can make an analogy to Cagean environmental listening, something I'm willing to bet we all don't do nearly as much as we "should". (I try to at least once or twice a day!)

Yikes...there's probably a way to explain this better, but...

Walt, I understand your point. I guess I could have catalogued the pieces and sounds therein but in the case of some pieces of music, I can't help but think of that as secondary to the expression of other ideas. Now, 1) I may be entirely wrong in what I'm attributing to work like this (though I don't think so, at least not entirely) and 2) other listeners (perhaps like Jacob, above) may not have the slightest interest in those aspects. All well and good; as Richard pointed out, I'm sure there are others who approach 'between' on a different tack and you, as potential consumer, should check them out as well.

btw, I've met Tim only once, I think, a few years ago at Tonic and occasionally have enjoyable e-correspondence with him. Don't know Bunsho.

Thanks for the stylus link, Richard. I'll check it out.

Brian, I might have long ago been brainwashed by Stravinsky's remark that music doesn't mean anything at all. At any rate, as you indicate this recording is different from their predecessor collab, I'm shallow enough to be mostly curious about whether they're using the same machines, the same types (and pitches) of sounds, the amount of repetition (whether by the use of delays or whatever), that kind of stuff. I liked their first Erst., but it's kind of whistley for me to want to listen to it much. Plus, I don't like to have to move my head around to get the full effect of any recording.

I'm lazy as well as shallow.

I've no idea about Toshi's set-up (I'd guess he doesn't change it much, but I don't know for a fact), but Keith pretty regularly changes his, sometimes drastically. Not sure, off-hand, if the 'between' sessions were done on the most recent set-up, the "fragmented guitar", or not.

You'd probably like (at least) the 13630 kHz track, btw. Pretty ferocious stuff, on a rough par with some of Xenakis' noisier electronic pieces, not to mention much of the work being created by the No Fun crowd.

The couple of times I've seen Toshi play this year there has been a guitar on the table again, so there has been an evolution in his way of working similar to the way Keith continually changes his set up. Watching him though, he doesn't play the guitar as such, but does pretty close to what Rowe can often be seen doing these days, using a pair of headphones against the pick-up and strings to create a simple feedback loop which he then shaped using the mixer. Amusingly though, whilst Keith can be seen hunched over a tiny pair of white apple earbuds, Toshi chose the biggest pair of cans on the market I reckon!

Film of Toshi playing this year can be found here; http://web.mac.com/misha_david/iWeb/mishaXdavid/Blog/661F9201-72F7-4AC0-BC65-635A126F0265.html but its hard to make out much of what is going on there.

Thanks to you both for the additional info.

yeah, between is the first record where Keith uses his cut-down, "cubist" guitar, his far-more-high-powered shortwave, and his laptop. Toshi didn't have a guitar, just his NIMB.

"jon when might the stangl/fagashinski drop. will it be a straight improv dis? same question for the yoshida/kurzman? by striahgt improv i dont mean a totally unedited hard line defination, i just mean taken from improv, as opposed to remixes or compositions or anythign like that? just curious."

the Ami/Christof disc is close to done, and if all goes well, will be out by ErstQuake at the end of September, I'm going to Earl Howard's to master it this afternoon, hopefully the Queens power grid will hold out. as far as I know, it's all improv. the Kai/Burkhard one will likely be at least another year, and I think the plan is for pre-composed pieces (not post-composed), but Kai can maybe fill you in more if he's lurking here.

almost every Erst meets your above definition of improv, FWIW. there's almost never composition in post-production, with a few exceptions.

Walt, this one follows much more in the lineage of Good Morning Good Night than Weather Sky, if that helps. Dan W. said in his recent Wire review that "between can be seen as the third part of a trilogy of monumental Erstwhile double albums, beginning with Duos for Doris and continuing with Good Morning Good Night. it's just as important.", which I think is dead on.

Do you expect to put up any sound clips at the Erst site in the near future?

they were supposed to be there a while back, the guy running my site had some trouble with his software, but I'll ask again.

it s really funny to watch all that i must say

best
n

Brian,

When you explain the concept in terms of visual art, it seems a lot clearer (though still not entirely). It's the translation of that to musical terms that I'm having trouble with. I guess I'm getting too caught up in what the objects are in 'the space between two objects'. Does the thought of this space in the abstract simply serve as hand of caravaggio? That is, as a creative focus point? Or is Keith referring to a real space between two real objects (two people, two musics, I dunno) and of the goings on in that real space?

Sergio,

In a few mails since I posted this, Keith has mentioned other types of spaces that concerned him such as the one between artist and canvas (staring across it, going through it to apply a new coat, staring again, etc.) Also:

"An aspect of "between" which I feel is interesting is:- you know in painting how one is hemmed in / constrained / limited / restricted by all the thousands of things you can not do, all those places you can not visit one therefore carefully negotiates that ultra fine line through the minefield of non possibilities."

So, that sort of mental obstacle course, too.

I was concentrating more on psychological space between individuals. The first time I ever spoke to Keith, at an AMM show in Boston, he talked a lot about the impossibility of really communicating, musically, with his companions. That there would always be a wall of sorts beyond which you can't get. The thing is, he didn't say this in a despairing way but more as a recognition of its reality and being able to use this "psychological fact" to create more meaningful music rather than ignore it as, perhaps, most do.

Digging under the skin, you know.

"Jacob, I don't think you *have* to listen to things on an intellectual as opposed to visceral level--I don't really like to distinguish between the two,"

It's a pretty artifical distinction, I agree. I guess I was referring more to the distinction between immediacy and overall form.

"truth be told--but when you have some reason to believe that at least one of the participants does indeed tend to have "extra-musical" concerns (as might Toshi although, as I mentioned in the write-up, he generally prefers not to talk about the music he makes--not so with Rowe), I feel under some amount of obligation to try to appreciate that aspect in order to (attempt to) fully understand the music. Others may not feel that obligation."

You obviously have more background than myself as far as Rowe's music. Perhaps you can fill us in:
1) What types of concepts does he employ?
2) Does he let the other musicians involved "in" on the concepts?
3) To what extent and on what level does he expect that listeners will be able to "grasp" these concepts?

"other listeners (perhaps like Jacob, above) may not have the slightest interest in those aspects."

I'm actually quite interested in these aspects, but I'm skeptical of being able to grasp them on a concrete level simply by listening to the music. To really fully understand the concept behind music I think would be very very complex and probably only expressed on an intutitive level, which is why we do it thru music, not words. So while I am certaintly going to TRY to grasp the concept, I never expect that I fully will. That's why I'm questioning your concern over not being able to concretely grasp the concept behind this disc.

"The first time I ever spoke to Keith, at an AMM show in Boston, he talked a lot about the impossibility of really communicating, musically, with his companions. That there would always be a wall of sorts beyond which you can't get."

...Which would seem to support my viewpoint, but perhaps I'm just reading into it what I want to hear.

?

Good points, Jacob, and I don't know if I'll be able to satisfactorily explain except in the general sense that, the more you know about the background of an artist or a given work, chances are the more you'll be able to read into it. Doesn't have to be a particularly arcane creation--I imagine there are tons of pop songs that one first appreciates as a "song" and then, if one later finds out the back story, hears in a new light. I don't think it's too much different in this case, though hopefully more meaningful. There's resonance, if you will, in music like this, many layers of potential meaning and the listener can tease out those he finds especially salient. A track like "Amann" can, imho, easily be listened to purely as a rich (even delicious!) drone; no problem. But if you at the very least take cognizance of the album's title, it might give you an inkling that other matters could be at play, more so if you know that Rowe titles his releases with some care. If, further, you've acquired some knowledge of Rowe's approach to projects (not necessarily privileged info--he's pretty open about this sort of thing. Also, I don't mean to downplay Toshi's contributions, ideational or otherwise, it's just that he doesn't talk or write very much about them.), you might do a little extra searching for meaning.

I mean, you routinely look at something like a Rothko and don't only gauge how the blocks of color work with/against each other (though you probably do do that). You also read it poetically (for lack of a better term), abstracting out meaning from the forms, probably translating it somehow into a reflection of some aspect of human psychology. Some music, for me, lends itself to similar interpretive action on the part of the listener.

Probably as clear as mud. Approaching it as one does a poem might not be such a bad idea though....

"1) What types of concepts does he employ?"

Not sure what you mean here, but each project tends to have its own concerns, often overlapping.

"2) Does he let the other musicians involved "in" on the concepts?"

I think it's pretty much routine for him, when the project is on his initiation, to have detailed discussions with the other participants beforehand, not about what he expects them to play, of course, but on the more general ideas behind it. Like discussing Caravaggio with MIMEO.

"3) To what extent and on what level does he expect that listeners will be able to "grasp" these concepts"

That I don't know. Guessing, I'd say he has no particular expectations along those lines but is comfortable in the knowledge that he's "placed" them there for those interested in looking.

...the more you know about the background of an artist or a given work, chances are the more you'll be able to read into it. Doesn't have to be a particularly arcane creation--I imagine there are tons of pop songs that one first appreciates as a "song" and then, if one later finds out the back story, hears in a new light.

Especially Joni Mitchell songs with respect to figuring out whether she's talking about Graham Nash, Tom Scott, James Taylor, etc., etc.

""1) What types of concepts does he employ?"

Not sure what you mean here, but each project tends to have its own concerns, often overlapping. "

Can you give some examples?

Well, I was thinking about Carly Simon. But close enough!

We're so old.....

""1) What types of concepts does he employ?"

Not sure what you mean here, but each project tends to have its own concerns, often overlapping. "

Can you give some examples?

Well, the current MIMEO project, which I think is tentatively titled, "Cy Twombly". Rowe was inspired by Twombly's occasional method of painting/drawing where he'd blindfold himself, switch his pencil/paintbrush to his left hand and go at it the paper/canvas. He's asked the other members of the band, on their own where they live, to create a handful of minutes of music (maybe 4-5) on a 60-minute disc, situated within that disc as they choose, but created *as though* they were improvising with everyone else, ie, taking into account what they think they others will do and accommodating them. This raises all sorts of Prisoner's Dilemma issues, something I've personally always found fascinating and which, I think, one sees played out in the world all the time. I believe this was preceded by a discussion of Twombly and the ideas behind his work.

So, each musician is to send his or her disc to (I think) Marcus Schmickler--actually, I think the deadline was to have been Aug. 1--who would consolidate them *without listening to them*. The resultant 60 minute disc, presumably with large areas of silence (like the white areas in Twombly's paintings) would be sent to a record label who would issue it *without having heard it*. So the first person to hear the piece wouldn't be the musicians, wouldn't be the label owner--it would be the person who buys the disc.

anyway, that's one of the recent ones....Whether that's more an art/performance piece than music, well, that's another question.

All this boils down to the simplest equation.

That the work has to be done in the listener's head.

"But if you at the very least take cognizance of the album's title, it might give you an inkling that other matters could be at play, more so if you know that Rowe titles his releases with some care."

I can understand this with "Harsh" because it is pretty straightforward and he actually discusses this in the liner notes.

I searched for some of Rowe's ideas of "between" and came up with the below quote from an interview with Warburton. He is discussing Treatise. In the printed interview the word "between" is emphasized (being technically inept I can't figure out how to italisize it here...)

Rowe: "There are lots of different ways of reading it [Treatise]; you can read the actual symbols and shapes, or you can read between the symbols and shapes, which would be more of a Marxist way of doing it"

http://www.paristransatlantic.com/magazine/interviews/rowe.html

Food for thought.

"All this boils down to the simplest equation.

That the work has to be done in the listener's head. "

All hail the creative listener!

Very interesting thread here, thanks to all for the additional information.

I have to say what I've heard about this upcoming MIMEO project is really interesting. Whether it will be one of those projects whose concept is more interesting then the results, of course remains to be seen. I can't help but to think of disc 5 on Filaments 'BOX' where Otomo and Sachiko were playing without being able to hear each other. After the first 4, stunning discs in that set, the disconnect is obvious. I think of that disc of a demonstration of how strongly connected they are, how vital their communication is, then as a successful piece of music.

This raises all sorts of Prisoner's Dilemma issues, something I've personally always found fascinating and which, I think, one sees played out in the world all the time.

I also am very interested in game theory and how it's models can be used in examining certain events. However in this case I don't think that it is a successful application. I mean I can kind of see where you are going here, how the musician must decide for each sound event whether it will be amenable to what their sound may make. So one can apply the model by taking playing as if one is "soloing" as defecting and playing as if one is interacting with the (somewhat predictable) sounds of the other members as cooperation. This fits the basic model, but the payoff matrix doesn't apply. For this to work out "soloing" when the other playing decides to "cooperate" should have the highest payoff for the defector. But how does that work? It would much more likely lead to an unmusical clash. No, this doesn't fit the Prisoners Dilemma model very well, because there are three states: Solo, Collaborate, Don't Play. So the highest payoff in a Prisoners Dilemma sense would be to solo when all the other players are silent. But this is nonsensical from a listeners perspective, as while this may work oiut - a perfect sound out of the silence, the biggest payoff could be, when multiple players collaborate. So this throws the decision matrix off completely. Not to mention the 10 players issue...

Still an interesting way to think of it and I've enjoyed analysis. For those curious about the Prisoners Dilemma the Wikipedia page is pretty good: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner's_dilemma

:-)

Yeah, the mapping isn't optimal! But still, the cooperate/defect issue (and I think you got to one of the potential tripping points--the idea of soloing) would seem to lurk in there in one guise or another. I should point out that the whole notion of the Prisoner's Dilemma aspect is of my own introduction and hasn't been mentioned by Rowe so far as I know.

"Well, the current MIMEO project, which I think is tentatively titled, "Cy Twombly". Rowe was inspired by Twombly's occasional method of painting/drawing where he'd blindfold himself, switch his pencil/paintbrush to his left hand and go at it the paper/canvas."

- That started when Twombly was in the military doing something with codes, he often had to work in the dark and would draw in the dark without being able to see.

Pretty soon people will really get fed up with me endlessly linking to it, but Keith talks about the MIMEO project in the audition interview we did with him earlier this year:

http://www.auditionradio.info/Keith%20Rowe%20Page.html

between is a very complex animal that I don't think even Keith and Toshi really fully understand yet. The most overriding element of 'betweeness' for me is the relationship between Keith and Toshi as musicians. In a relatively short period of time they have developed a language, an understanding, a method of challenging each other that is probably closer than Keith ever managed within AMM, at least not in the last ten years of their existence.

So the interplay between these two, as well as the physical space in the room, the distance they are apart and the sound filling the negative shapes between them are all part of what make up between.

Its just not an easy album to talk about or to try and explain the way it makes you feel. There are very few albums in this area of music that I can actually picture the musicians playing in the studio while I listen, but this is one of them, its a very intimate, naked recording of two musicians working together if that makes the remoest bit of sense...

between is often described as in similar lineage to Good Morning, good night, which is probably true, but I personally feel a real connection with the people playing on between, an emotion coming through somehow much stronger than on most CDs I listen to in this 'genre' that makes me think of Duos for Doris rather than GMGN, which is a very abstract and difficult to penetrate recording.

Perhaps I have just spent more time trying to understand between than any other disc, giving it an unfair advantage, but no CD has ever enthralled me and confused me in equal amounts as much as this one has, as my words here probably show! :)

Richard. That's funny. My first thoughts on "between" as a title was that it was a reference to the interaction "between" the two musicians, as you've picked up on.

But after reading Rowe's bit about Treatise, and his comment about "that ultra fine line through the minefield of non possibilities", I am thinking that it is about playing in between the music, playing in the cracks between where the music exists. But perhaps it is supposed to have multiple meanings. Hmmm......now we're getting out there. Mabye we should just listen some more.

I agree with hatta that the MIMEO thing sounds problematic. Who knows, it could be great; there are certainly good musicians involved. However, the idea of putting out an artwork (musical or otherwise) blindly seems troublesome. Fun, but troublesome. One expects that Twombly at least turned on the lights and viewed his "blind-work" himself before deciding whether or not to put it out into the world. But maybe I'm wrong.

it took us months to title this record, with numerous vetoed titles along the way. in the end, between was Keith's suggestion and it fits perfectly. it has numerous meanings, but for me the primary one references the photo that the cover painting is based on, between here and around the corner.

also, for the record, Toshi did the mixing and mastering on both this and the 4g project, he's become superb at both of these over the last few years. between is as much his record as it is Keith's, just in case anyone wasn't clear on that.

Yes, but not just the interaction between the two musicians at the same level we are used to Jacob, but something deeper, something based in the fact that Keith has felt more pushed, more inspired by working with Toshi than anyone else for a very long time.
between explores that intense relationship and its possibilities a lot to my ears, but yes 'the cracks between the music' hits a key point too I think.

The Twombly disc could ONLY work if it made it all the way to the pressing plant without anyone making any judgements on its quality if you ask me. I think its a really interesting idea, and the end result is not as important as the process in this case. Not sure what you would call this one though, its not quite a composition or an improvisation?!

'between is the first record where Keith uses his cut-down, "cubist" guitar'

Time to bore folks. That guitar is a Hohner G2, a copy of the Steinberger GL2 guitar. Like the original Steinberger it copies the body came from the maker in that rectangular shape. It has the tuning machines for the strings at the back end of the body, unlike most guitars which have them mounted on a headstock at the low end of the neck.

I suspect Rowe started using that in place of his old Hofner(different brands, not a misspelling)hollowbody for practical reasons. Being considerably smaller it makes for more room for other materials on his playing surface, and is easier to reach around. And being small he can probably take it as carry on luggage instead of having it subject to the tender mercies of the baggage handlers when he flies.

I'm not sure of the details about the guitar, but the practicalities Tim mentions are probably not key reasons. There is less and less on Keith's table every time I see him play these days, so its not a space saving issue, though I don't doubt its a blessing that its easier to carry.

The shape is one main reason for the choice I believe, hence its moniker 'the cubist guitar', but there is a great deal of careful thought that goes into every change to the table layout, and the change of guitar will most probably have been a careful decision based on a lot more than mere portability.

i think there's a misunderstanding, here: tim is right about the hohner, but i think what the other guys mean is what's now left of that hohner, after keith sawed away some parts.

Richard said:

"something based in the fact that Keith has felt more pushed, more inspired by working with Toshi than anyone else for a very long time."

when we finished Weather Sky and were about to release it, Keith wrote to Toshi and myself, "in many ways this is a kind of music that I've waited to make for 30 years, but there was never anyone who felt the need to do it".

>>So the first person to hear the piece wouldn't be the musicians, wouldn't be the label owner--it would be the person who buys the disc.

What about the mastering engineer?

"What about the mastering engineer?"

no, Marcus Schmickler will just layer them without listening or adjusting.

Without LISTENING???

"but there is a great deal of careful thought that goes into every change to the table layout"

Yes, like "How long should I make my Carpenters song-loop to ensure that utter tedium wins out over 'clever' irony?" followed by "Do I really need anything other than the Carpenter's sample tonight?" (October Gallery, London 2005)

I'd maybe consider his guitar cubist if he managed to cut it in such a way that you could see the underside while its laid on the table

:)

Each to their own Michael. Personally I'd say the performance of a page from Treatise that you are referring to is one of the best live sets I've witnessed this year, and I've seen a good few, but we all have our opinions.

I'm not sure however, what your perception of a live show has to do with the line you quoted from me regarding how Rowe lays out his table, or the album under discussion, but there you go.

Sorry the relevance to your quote regarding Mr. Rowe's setup wasn't clear enough. I found it humorous to imagine Mr. Rowe taking 'a great deal of careful thought' over whether to include 'Yesterday Once More' by The Carpenters in his table repetoire.

And I indicated that I didn't like its use (sorry giving an unpopular opinion), which makes the 'careful thought' even funnier, because then I picture him deciding whether to give me Torture By Carpenters or not.

I'll remember to stay out of the clubhouse from now on.

M

"I'll remember to stay out of the clubhouse from now on."
It seems to be perfectly acceptable behaviour here at Bagatellen to do so and lob bricks through the window at the EAI buffs propping up the bar, Michael. I myself am rather amused at the discussion of Rowe's setup (shades of all those hairy geeks who used to sit about discussing Jimi Hendrix's gear) and still waiting for Jon Abbey to explain how a mastering engineer, especially one as talented and musical as Marcus Schmickler, can do his work without listening (and this after speculating on Phil Freeman's deafness on another thread)..
FWIW, I think the Stylus review is OK as far as it goes (a little over the top, perhaps, but well intentioned), and I'm afraid on balance I agree with Ted about the excessive "I"s in Brian's piece. But it's a brave attempt to get to grips with music that is notoriously hard to write about.

"still waiting for Jon Abbey to explain how a mastering engineer, especially one as talented and musical as Marcus Schmickler, can do his work without listening"

this isn't a project I'm involved in directly, so really you'd have to ask Keith or Marcus specifically.

but since the underlying idea here is for no one to hear this music beforehand, I don't think it's very difficult to simply layer all eleven discs of source sounds on top of each other without listening to them.

"I mean, you routinely look at something like a Rothko and don't only gauge how the blocks of color work with/against each other (though you probably do do that). You also read it poetically (for lack of a better term), abstracting out meaning from the forms, probably translating it somehow into a reflection of some aspect of human psychology. Some music, for me, lends itself to similar interpretive action on the part of the listener."

totally irrelevant to "between," but to me, the above represents everything I *don't* want to do when I see art (or hear music...or, Jibby forbid, read poetry). Yikes.

Simply, you load the ten, eleven, however many CDRs into Pro Tools or something similar with the sound turned off, run the resulting piece watching the gauge to ensure it doesn't go into the red, adjust the gain on any tracks if necessary (its quite possible they don't even intend to do this) and then burn a final master and post it, unheard to the pressing plant. Seems obvious to me, and there are probably other, more technical ways of doing the same thing.

The whole project is fascinating to me. I'd release the resulting album if I was asked without question :)

my humbly submitted .02 cents...

Though I think it's interesting to discuss Keith Rowe's setup and his specific concepts and reasoning for making the musical choices that he makes. (I do like to read about it)...

What makes what he does "work" for me is that when I listen I can tell that there are very specific limitations being imposed and that a great deal of thought is put into each choice to do or not do something. I do not recognize the language being used because it is someone else's that is being changed all the time - but I can tell that there is a human ordering principle behind it.

... this is something I feel strongly about, before, and now after, being acquainted with the concepts behind Keith's work - specifically choosing him because he does like to discuss it. (the audition radio interview is great!)

So in this way, the concept behind music like this comes ever closer to the actual sound of it - in learning more background info it has only confirmed what I thought I heard when simply listening without knowing.

Too many times I've read about the conception of a music before I actually got to hear it - and upon listening I could not hear any of the ideas that were supposedly informing the piece ("music of the spheres"-type stuff, and so on).

If a music is relying on me to bring my cultural baggage to the table in order to make it successful then there can be a problem. With a recording such as "between" I can let it simply exist on its own terms much more than I can with other music.

My introduction to this music was "Weather Sky", and the quote from Keith about "Weather Sky" that Jon shared absolutely hits the nail on the head for me:

"in many ways this is a kind of music that I've waited to make for 30 years, but there was never anyone who felt the need to do it"

When I talk about this music to people who have never heard it I keep coming back to the idea that there really is nothing to "get" about it.

The music becomes complex when I place my expectations onto it, it is simple when I do not.

- Bryan

A valuable two cents' worth. It has taken Keith Rowe approximately 40 years to get himself to this place. So the obligation is upon us, the listeners, to do him (and ourselves) equal justice.

"The mental image that seemed to best describe this music: You know when you fool around with a pair of bar magnets and position like poles adjacent to each other, the invisible yet obvious tensile field that occurs, that area with imperceptible borders which nonetheless manifests with clarity at a given point? That’s the image I had—several lines spiraling around each other, forming a solid coherent whole when viewed from a distance but retaining clear, almost self-sufficient identities if I shifted my ears appropriately. That “either/or, neither/nor” experience is quite delicious." - Brian Olewnick

13630 khz totally does that to me. Lovely review.

re: mimeo cd

if more than two or three players recorded material for the same block of time within the 60 minutes, there could be some pretty ugly clipping involved. i presume there'd have to be a bit of (blind) compression/limiting on the master. but perhaps even that would be considered mucking up the elegance of the concept.

who of the members do y'all predict placed there sound at the very begining of the disc? somebody had to. who do you think is at the end? will the packaging ever reveal whose contributions are where?

"Simply, you load the ten, eleven, however many CDRs into Pro Tools or something similar with the sound turned off, run the resulting piece watching the gauge to ensure it doesn't go into the red, adjust the gain on any tracks if necessary (its quite possible they don't even intend to do this) and then burn a final master and post it, unheard to the pressing plant. Seems obvious to me"

Do excuse me while I go and rinse out my boxer shorts. Well well, if you think that's all there is to mastering, Richard, I recommend you spend a day with a professional. If I were you I'd stick to buying the discs and let other people take care of producing them.
William's observations above are spot on - I would imagine the engineer would not only have to listen but also make some pretty important decisions in the event of such a sonic pile-up. Marcus's input was critical to the success of the Hands of Caravaggio project, and I imagine it would be to the Twombly project too.

Dan, I think the point is that the members of MIMEO have been discussing the specifics of this project for months and months, discussions Richard, Brian and myself are not privy to. I'm sure they're well aware of the potential pitfalls and are trying to find ways around them, if they haven't already. maybe if Cor is around, he can give us more specifics. off the top of my head, one thing they could do is map the disc out beforehand as to who can make sounds in which time intervals.

"If I were you I'd stick to buying the discs and let other people take care of producing them."

hehe, does this mean you're not interested in receiving Cathnor promos?

my guess is you're not aware that our boy Richard is in the midst of crossing over to the dark side of running his own label, first two releases out imminently (Boghossian using source material from Wastell and Tilbury, and Will Guthrie solo).

No I wasn't aware of that Jon and I suppose I've shot myself in the foot yet again (it's a wonder I can walk at all) but I stand by what I said: there's more to mastering than whacking everything into ProTools and fiddling with the levels, and RP will find that out soon enough if I doesn't know it already. Meanwhile good luck with the label, Richard!

Heh, thats funny. Dan you're right, I know little about mastering and of course there is a whole lot more to it (as I did sort of hint) but I still say that in the spirit of the MIMEO project my basic method would work to produce a CD without anyone listening to it. No, it won't be a well mastered CD but it would be a CD. Thats what I was trying to get at! If a way cannot be found to master the disc without it being listened to then I don't think the project would happen.

As for the first two Cathnors, Mssrs Boghossian and Samartzis have done the work don't worry!
You are still on the promo list Dan and always will be, just promise me that before you touch the CDs you'll wash your hands after doing that to your boxer shorts... :)

hi there,
some info about what a mastering is.
the operation consists in equalizing the final stereo mixdown after the mix to correct the ensemble sound a bit and working on the overall frequency balance. then, you have to compress the sound according to diffent frequency ranges (lows, mid-low, mid-high,high)and then compressing/limiting the whole thing a bit.
(compressing means reducing the dynamic range in order to be able to pump the volume up a great deal, and to control the difference in level between the softest and the loudest)
Dan is perfectly right, you cannot do a good mastering without listening to what you are doing
and idem for the mix.
in the case of the mimeo record, i assume no mixing and no mastering at all, except for cranking the general volume up is the only way to keep with the original idea

all the best

I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...I think we got it basile, thanks anyway ...

If something's worth saying, it's worth saying eight times. Ask Steve Reich. (Though the upload of comments seems to be awfully slow here.. maybe that would explain it)

OK, up front, I know absolutely nothing about mastering. But let's assume Dan and others are more or less correct, that there would be "problems" of various kinds if the masterer did as instructed and listened to nothing, just laid in the contents of the ten discs.

We're not talking about the reproduction of a live or studio event here. This is an assemblage and, I imagine, would be more profitably experienced by someone not expecting the sheen of your average, well-mastered recording. Remember, it's referencing Cy Twombly and particularly those works done blindfolded and left-handed. One could criticise those paintings and drawings for analogous reasons (excessive white space, inconsistency of tonal palette, lack of cohesion in composition) but that would, I dare say, be missing the point.

If this project eventuates, I would think the listener would benefit from approaching the piece from a very different angle than he does your standard eai release. How, exactly, I dunno! But it should be rewarding trying.

"more profitably experienced by someone not expecting the sheen of your average, well-mastered recording."
Hmm. Tell that to Marcus. I doubt someone with a pair of ears as good as Schmickler's would agree to put his / her name to anything that doesn't SOUND 100% fuckin' excellent. For all the indeterminacy the concept might imply, Brian, you shouldn't underestimate the perfectionism of the subject of your forthcoming biography..
"If this project eventuates, I would think the listener would benefit from approaching the piece from a very different angle than he does your standard eai release."
Whaddyamean? No shooting the breeze on Bags?
Anyway, I look forward to hearing it one day. So far nothing in the MIMEO discography, very listenable and accomplished though it all is, has ever added up to more than the sum of its parts (like the great AMM albums) imo.

"Brian, you shouldn't underestimate the perfectionism of the subject of your forthcoming biography."

in some ways, yes, but in terms of relinquishing control of a collaborative project at a certain point and being generally content with however it turns out, he does that all the time, I wish everyone I worked with was so flexible in that aspect.

anyway, I don't get what's so hard to understand about this project, it seems like a pretty straightforward idea to me. I doubt that it'll end up working that well, I'm not interested at all in releasing it myself, but I'll certainly pick up a copy as soon as possible.

Dan, it doesn't make too much sense to directly compare MIMEO and AMM. AMM was (at least for the last two decades) a trio, each of their inputs was clear, identifiable, and a strong presence. MIMEO has always had 11 or 12 musicians, and the main obstacle they've struggled with since the outset is imposing their own constraints, how to harness all of those individual voices so they're not constantly talking over each other. I personally thought the Caravaggio disc did this extremely well, but I guess you don't agree. do you think Globe Unity Orchestra or ICP records are really "more than the sum of their parts"? I don't think it really works that way, I think that's a pretty impossible standard for a large improvising ensemble filled with improvisers of this level.

"it's referencing Cy Twombly and particularly those works done blindfolded and left-handed."

Do you know which works those are? Did Twombly actually work that way or was he just influenced by that way of working?
I have around 50 Twombly books including the massive "writings on Twombly" and all I have read about was that working in the dark in the army and drawing left handed influenced his work.
Anyway, If you know the specific works it would be interesting to look at them, I'm sure I have a reproduction.
There was some talk about that in the early works of "50 years of works on paper" an incredible show that traveled a year or two ago.

An interesting thing here is that Twombly was very influenced by Cage from his studies at Black Mountain college so it creates kind of a loop.
I find his work relates to improvised music much better than most other genres of music.

Damon, sorry don't know any specific Twombly's that apply though I have general memories of seeing some that (before all this MIMEO stuff happened) I thought I might have read or been told that the blindfold method was employed. ie, the notion struck me as familiar in some way. Googling around, though, I didn't come across any specific examples. Dunno, maybe Keith imagined it! (doubt that, though).

As a rule, however, I defer to anyone with 50 Twombly books!

"I doubt someone with a pair of ears as good as Schmickler's would agree to put his / her name to anything that doesn't SOUND 100% fuckin' excellent. For all the indeterminacy the concept might imply, Brian, you shouldn't underestimate the perfectionism of the subject of your forthcoming biography"

This is not a music cd, it is the recorded evidence of a conceptual art piece. the concept is the art, not the resultant music and therefore "perfectionism" in this case would be to execute that concept without any compromise to it. It is much more important to this piece that nobody listen to the cd before it is pressed than for it to sound good. to muck up the elegance of the concept by altering it for the sake of aesthetics would be to undermine rowe's/mimeo's "perfectionism."

having said that, I'm not going to argue that this process necessarily produces interesting music, or even a cd worth listening to twice. We'll see. (Other pieces of conceptual process music have been quite great-- see recent Anti-Music thread on IHM).

when twombly first came up on this thread, it reminded me that i liked what i'd seen of his, so i checked some books out from the library. one called cy twombly: a monograph, by richard leeman, mentions work he did in the dark. the wording's a little weird, but i think the drawings referred to are all from 1954, all untitled, mostly pencil and colored pencil on paper. this is at the start of chapter 2, and twombly seems to have considered these drawings as "pointing in the direction taken by all his subsequent work."

"one called cy twombly: a monograph, by richard leeman, mentions work he did in the dark. the wording's a little weird, but i think the drawings referred to are all from 1954, all untitled, mostly pencil and colored pencil on paper. this is at the start of chapter 2, and twombly seems to have considered these drawings as "pointing in the direction taken by all his subsequent work." "

- That is a great book, probably the best one to get if you are only going to get one.
So I pulled it off the shelf and read that chapter. It still does not expressly say those works are made in the dark or blindfolded.
But it does say he made them durring the time he was in the army and that he drew in the dark.
Anyway, it is really great Keith is working with concepts like these and that Jon is publishing them for us to hear.

"This is not a music cd, it is the recorded evidence of a conceptual art piece. the concept is the art, not the resultant music"
Uggh, the Brandon Labelle syndrome. If that's true, and if that's what the musicians themselves say it is and believe it is, you can count me out. I don't care how cute the concept is, if it's a CD it's the goddamn sound that matters.

Speaking as a fan, and not as a mastering engineer (though I have mastered half a dozen or so discs, tracked and mixed many others...): if the mastering engineer didn't listen to it, why should I?

ok, I'm going to try one more time here. MIMEO has struggled throughout their existence with collective discipline during performances. they play together maybe once or twice a year tops, and when they do, they're obviously generally very pumped up about it. so if there's not some kind of overarching structure in place beforehand, the sets can quickly jump to a dense mass of noise, and often not an especially interesting one.

so, how do you address this tendency as a group? well, maybe one way is with this kind of project, where I believe the rules are that each individual disc can only have a total of four or five minutes of music on it, so a huge amount of individual restraint is obviously involved.

again, I'm not directly involved with this project and haven't discussed it with any of the members since last fall with Keith, so it's possible that it's changed. what's funny is how quick people are to pass judgment before the record's even been made, especially on the basis of second-hand educated guesses regarding the specifics.

you mean "pumped" like this: http://realultimatepower.net/

Seriously, I know very little about recording technology but even I know there are ways to visually see what is happening on the computer screen while mastering.

I suggest we all wait for Brian to review it before we buy. And then Brian, my good man, you shall be held fully responsible for the consequences.

"especially on the basis of second-hand educated guesses regarding the specifics"

That's what the internet is all about!

I think all Bagatellen contributors should write their reviews of it now, and Al can paste the text together whilst blindfolded.

"Speaking as a fan, and not as a mastering engineer (though I have mastered half a dozen or so discs, tracked and mixed many others...): if the mastering engineer didn't listen to it, why should I?"

Well, many people enjoy the sounds of diverse "nature": car engines mixed with birds and insects and people talking in the distance. Sirens, beetles. It's all accidental, and there's no mixer in the sky, but it's nice. Maybe that's the idea here. I don't see why it mightn't be nice too.

There are no guarantees, of course, and I wouldn't buy it myself without hearing a decent-sized clip. But it doesn't seem so much different from an unedited field recording to me.

http://www.scaruffi.com/avant/rowe.html
Enjoy - and too bad that it is not updated...

"I think all Bagatellen contributors should write their reviews of it now, and Al can paste the text together whilst blindfolded."

-Or I can write them for them:

Brian O.:
"This cd is deliciously wonderful, with every listen I get closer grasping the depth and wonderous succulent amazing, sizzling, crackling detail, I can't decide if I like frying bacon or music more etc, etc,"

PDF:
"I have heard at least 5 Keith Rowe cds of those this one is the best - mostly because of the violin playing Ramsey Ameen.
I wonder if Keith Rowe ever Played with Eddie Prévost?
He made a cd of just gongs and gongs are made of metal, metal bands have guitars- I am an expert about metal and very serious about it too. etc, etc.

sigh, okay, you people in the dark.... :-)

Damon, hihi, okay cool, one of our first jokes was that it should be reviewed without listening to....

anyway,
yes, every member should contribute about 3-5 minutes. Keeping lots of things in mind. Such as 1 minute of something loud occupies more space then 1 minute of something soft etc. So thinking space more then time.
Keith sent 2 pictures of CT to demonstrate what he thought this project could mean and as an inspiration etc.
But for the rest nothing was said much and of course there where lots of misunderstandings.....
I randomly chose from some different soundsources and put them on a time table in ProTools with my eyes closed. The soundsources where some MezzoForte EMS/turntable frases, some Pianissimo ebowpiano, and a one minute “composed thing” from some LP samples etc.
But I also know that Pita made something of which he has no idea what it is and how long, and how much space it would occupy......
I really like this project myself and can’t wait to hear it......

Actually, most label owners release cd’s without having heared them..... The Carravagio release was already discussed before we had done it..... Jon? ;-)

Djees, we have some mastering geniuses here on Bags....... :-P

Cor

Thanks Cor, sounds like chaos.....

I really want to release this :)

"The Carravagio release was already discussed before we had done it..... Jon? ;-)"

hehe, I've done one MIMEO release, and that's quite enough for this lifetime. working with you guys is like dealing with a mini-government, bureaucracy, miscommunications, subcommittees, the whole bit. I'll pass, thanks. :)

but I believe the nascent Cathnor (Richard P.) would be thrilled if this was offered, he's just scared that if he volunteers, it would violate the spirit of the idea. so send it his way, perfect fit!

"it should be reviewed without listening to...."

pfft...one of my fortes.... ;-)

Pita is the man.

thanks, Cor!

ha, I posted before seeing Richard's post before mine. there's your man!

I picked up Duos for Doris today - somehow I skipped that one.
Wow, beautiful cd.

"Actually, most label owners release cd’s without having heared them....."
Make that 'some' not 'most', surely, Cor! Unless you want to name names and tell us which other albums you know of that have been accepted for release without having been heard..
Love the Phil Freeman review above, Damon. I'm miffed you didn't try your hand at a DW parody though.

"Actually, most label owners release cd’s without having heared them....."

well, I guess what I meant is that the idea of a release is already there before the concert or recording session. It becomes very hard then to NOT release it. People also release thing because it was THEIR festival. etc
Grob did Mimeo because Felix just wanted to, it was his 3 day festival in Cologne. The serpentine galery wanted to do the Mimeo cd to get themselves on the "map" with some big names.....
They are nice cd's in my opinion, but I think only the Carravagio really stands out.
I know that for Nuscope Thomas Lehn recorded something with 2 others and finaly decided it wasn't good enough, much to the big disapointment of the label. Normally it would have just come out. That I guess is what I meant by releasing things without hearing it. Not literary but being fixed on an idea beforehand.
Cor

damon:"I think all Bagatellen contributors should write their reviews of it now, and Al can paste the text together whilst blindfolded."

-Or I can write them for them:"

Dan:"Love the Phil Freeman review above, Damon. I'm miffed you didn't try your hand at a DW parody though."

To even the score, here is as a review by Damon, by me:

DS: "this cd was pretty solid, but not as solid as four men of the guitar which is almost as solid as jackie brown or the big lebowski. so i sold it to jacob, but now that everyone is talking about it i might go buy it again at amoeba and pick up a nice grilled sausage while i am up there, or a calamari burrito. there is no bass on this record so while it may be good it will never be great."

"DS: "this cd was pretty solid, but not as solid as four men of the guitar which is almost as solid as jackie brown or the big lebowski. so i sold it to jacob, but now that everyone is talking about it i might go buy it again at amoeba and pick up a nice grilled sausage while i am up there, or a calamari burrito. there is no bass on this record so while it may be good it will never be great."

- That is about right on for "Between". However, Rowe's Twombly project has the possibilty of trancending even great by being about Twombly since I like Twombly's work even more than bass.
Dan, your review would be to professional and informative to make a joke out of. I actually like Brian O's writing, this review sold me on "Duos for Doris" and a second purchase of "Between".
It is just the predictabilty of him liking any of this stuff that can be funny.

For the record, I think it's a close call between "between" and a really good piece of bacon.

I did wait several months for someone else to write something about the disc, actually, but as no one here stepped forward.....

Glad you're enjoying "Doris"!

" ... Doris" ... three years late? Heavens above.

Somebody, it may have been Brian's review -- sold me too on 'Doris,' but, alas, the music didn't.

As far as the idea of writing an album review without actually listening to the album I suspect its been done before. For example JD Considine used to have a Rock Short Takes column in the long defunct Musician magazine where he did capsule reviews of rock records. His review for the album GTR by the group of the same name was one line, "SHT," a lame response that made me wonder if he even bothered to listen to the album, or just decided on the basis of who was on it that it was horrible.

"Somebody, it may have been Brian's review -- sold me too on 'Doris,' but, alas, the music didn't.

Posted by: djll at August 9, 2006 08:15 PM"

It is working for me really well, maybe I am just in the mood for it.
Congratulations on the wire reviews - those are good cds.

Anyone know why the Serpentine MIMEO discs say they the band formed in 1998 when they played gigs in 1997? Is that just because Kaffe wasn't there in 97?

Also, to this Graham Rodgers who thinks that Damon is "3 years late" for listening to Duos with Doris: what is wrong with you? Most people don't buy CDs just because they are new. Most people with any intelligence are investigating all sorts of things from different points in history. Is the music less relevant because it's not 2003?
The kind of reckless, unabashed consumerism your post presumes to endorse, ie: I BUY ONLY THE LATEST AND GREATEST AND AFTER ONE MONTH IT'S STALE, is philosophically obscene.

MIMEO began as a promoter's project, different musicians were invited depending on the festival, those were the 1997 shows. in 1998, the musicians decided to set a regular lineup and make it an actual working project which they'd control, not promoters. that lineup is the same as today, except Markus Wettstein has left, making it an 11tet.

Hey Steve, it seemed to me that Graham was only joking... After all he's been talking about the British free scene from the 60's/70's in other threads.

Damon, I know this was Jacob riffing on you, and not you, but I'm totally curious about the calamari burrito. Good?

As for the writing of record reviews without having listened to them, the pioneer in the field (at least among critics willing to admit it) was Richard Meltzer who did it quite regularly for a while. I like his writing, but then again I also thought that Considine review was damn funny.

Or maybe I should write a review of the calamari burrito myself as Jacob imitating Damon since I've never had a calamari burrito at all. Ever.

Steve Barberry: Sadly you interpreted my comment to mean something contrary to what I intended, as Gerardo spotted, and as I'm sure Damon understood. I was not speaking in a "consumerist" sense. What I meant was that for us hoary 60 year-olds who were listening to Keith Rowe and John Tilbury back in 1965, separately, and then together as of 1982 when Tilbury joined AMM, we seriously craved a duo record from them. So when "Duos for Doris" finally appeared so many years later in 2003, we leapt off our seats in enthusiasm, knowing in advance that it would be as outstanding as it indeed was. In other words, we knew WHY we should jump at it instantly.

"Damon, I know this was Jacob riffing on you, and not you, but I'm totally curious about the calamari burrito. Good?"

- It was actually Weasel Walter who witnessed me eating it.
It was very solid, better than the grilled squid and octopus I made at our anual all-day improvised music BBQ last week.

On the subjects of two unrelated objects in visual art put together to make a work: I saw one of the best examples of that in Bob Rauschenberg's goat combine, you can see it here:
http://www.moca.org/museum/imagerotator.php?exid=368&id=839&PHPSESSID=70759f15d62c4afb65365c74cd8dbef7

I just returned from an L.A. trip specifically to see the Combines show. Well worth it.

Damon: Welcome back. Thanks to your thoughtful recommendation, the Bjørn Ianke version of Xenakis' "Theraps" arrived in the mail a day or two ago. A fine effort, though one wonders if Xenakis did not intend the piece to be less politely played.

i just saw the rauschenberg show tonight. fantastic. the eva hesse drawings were nice, too, though certainly not as impressive as the sf moma show of her work in '02 or '03.

>>- It was actually Weasel Walter who witnessed me eating it.

I had a very pleasant conversation with Weasel at the Flying Luttenbachers show at Tonic this past Wednesday (they played with a reunited, and gloriously so, Blind Idiot God). I was wondering whether any other bagatellen posters were there, but no one stopped by to say hi to him under those auspices that I noticed, so I guess not. Y'all missed a hell of a show. The new FLs disc is very good, too.

I'm curious to hear what Blind Idiot God sounds like now. Enjoyed them a great deal back when.

They're great. A tsunami of sound. Hawkins' playing is run through a lot more pedals than on their albums, though - closer in spirit to his solo disc Halo (released under the name Azonic, and well worth tracking down). Their current drummer is Tim Wyskida from Khanate; no idea what's become of Ted Epstein (who I once saw sub for Mick Harris at a Painkiller gig). Listening to - feeling, really - Hawkins' guitar surround my whole body, I felt like a major reason Sunn O))) has been getting so much hype the last few years is because of his absence from the field. He's doing much more interesting things with the physical application of extreme volume than Stephen O'Malley & co. They played some new material; I hope they make plans to record it soon.

Yeah, back in the early-mid 90s, I followed Hawkins' solo work and, by and large, thought it was pretty strong. I always kinda wondered what had become of him.

Epstein had a stint with Zorn and Sharp (I think the group was called Slan) but left, so I heard, after Zorn had stuck the mic down his throat one too many times for Epstein's comfort, a decision for which I give him much credit...

btw, Damon, I assume that's the same Rauschenberg combine show that was in NYC at the Met earlier this year. Wonderful exhibit! I dothink many of the ideas in his work from that period bear on many aspects of contemporary eai, particularly the opposition of "art" and the mundane. There's one piece that's half painting, half wooden ladder that I found marvelous in that regard. Pretty clear that the one wasn't any more beautiful (substitute your own term here) than the other.

"btw, Damon, I assume that's the same Rauschenberg combine show that was in NYC at the Met earlier this year. Wonderful exhibit! I dothink many of the ideas in his work from that period bear on many aspects of contemporary eai, particularly the opposition of "art" and the mundane. There's one piece that's half painting, half wooden ladder that I found marvelous in that regard. Pretty clear that the one wasn't any more beautiful (substitute your own term here) than the other."

-Same show. Less the combine NY MOMA just Bought for 30 million, It has a Twombly drawing collaged into it.
The double feature of the combines with the Hesse drawing show lured my girlfriend and I down there. It was a bit of a stretch to mount that big a of a show of her drawings, quite a few were spectacular but it had to be augmented too much by working drawings for her scupltures, as well as actual sculptures. The SFMOMA show was amazing, I actually saw it with Bryerton, Fuchs and Helma Schielf of A/L/L and FMP distribution.

There is a real loop between Cage, Cunningham and Rauschenberg in terms of implementing the same concepts across music, dance and visual art. The goat combine relates directly to Cunningham not hearing Cage's score before the performance and on and on.

A Keith Rowe biography would be a useful addition to my library; any chance of a mailing list for those interested?

I just saw this on Alex Ross's blog. It's a controversy that's come up here numerous times. As many people know by now, I'm (one of the few around, apparently) with Schonberg on this issue, having more concern about conflicts of interest than with "intimate knowledge" of what the musician is thinking. And I'm not sure Ross's fraternization with, e.g., a certain British composer who shall go unnamed, made his profile of that prodigy either "smarter" or "stronger" than it otherwise might have been--but I have to admit that it may well be his hanging out with those he writes about that has improved his game the last couple of years.

The great divide
The critics of The Guardian are engaged in a lively debate on the topic "Can critics and artists be friends?" As Tom Service notes, American attitudes on this subject tend to be stricter than British attitudes. The late Harold Schonberg, during his long reign at the New York Times, forbade even the slightest hint of critic-musician fraternization, and also prevented composers from working as critics at the paper. I believe that such policies were misguided, emblematic of a sort of Cold War emergency seriousness in the arts arena, and they led to criticism that was not as smart or strong as it could have been. For, as many participants in the Guardian debate point out, knowing how artists think and work can greatly deepen a critic's perspective.

That said, I generally avoid meeting the people I write about. I tend to write profiles only of artists whom I've long admired, or with whom I feel a strong identification. I was an avid fan of John Adams for more than ten years before I met him — my college roommates were subjected to days and nights of Nixon in China — and I don't think meeting him changed how I heard his music. The same goes for Esa-Pekka Salonen, whom I'm writing about now. I'm with Andrew Clements in thinking differently about composers in general: I'm biased toward them as a species, having tried to write music myself. They are at the center of my work, and I need to know what they are thinking.

The irony underlying this discussion is that some of our strongest prejudices — favorable or unfavorable — are directed toward people we've never met. Lack of contact lets us idolize our heroes and demonize our foes. The advantage of meeting people within the profession is that you see them as they really are. The danger is that you may end up liking a lot of them, tolerating most of the others, and madly loving rather few. For myself, I want to preserve at least some of the fantasy of fandom.

Very nice (just wondering what the connection was with the Between thread, but maybe I should read it all again). Cmon Walt, don't be COY, who is the "certain British composer"?

OK. Ades.