I think "Holz For Europa" showed there is a lot to pursue there, but no one seemed too.
That soprano trio on Potlatch is nice, too.

These "Propagations" are wonderful (just like the whole Potlatch collection!).
The reference to harmonium and organ is good ; JL Guionnet recorded "Pentes" (a bruit secret) + "Tirets" (hibari) on a church organ.

Yeah I've been enjoying this a lot, nice sense of balance throughout, high/low, rough/smooth, familiar/unfamiliar sounds and always far enough away from sounding like four saxaphones to keep me interested. :)

Pretty sure its one continual piece with track markers added rather than three separate pieces though.

"The first portion of second track gives me a bit of a problem, essentially because a large proportion of the sounds are key pops and other plosives, elements that carry a wee bit too much of that baggage from prior generations of free reedists."

why is that such a problem?

Oddly enough, Phil Durrant said the same thing to me about Jean-Luc (Guionnet)'s playing when he heard the album we did together in the metro station. It's certainly not a problem for me. I like notes and melodies too.

Don't worry, Dan. All is not lost. Hissing and scratching your horn with a piece of metal is still OK.

"why is that such a problem?"

Not *such* a problem, just that I'm immediately reminded of saxophonists since at least early Braxton who employed the same technique and my first reaction upon hearing it today is that it's a kind of fall-back position, a default of some sort, a "cool" sound that doesn't (to me) infer a lot of depth. Could be an unfair, subjective judgment but, hey, that's what I hear. Others may think the same about "hissing and scratching your horn with a piece of metal".

Wait a sec. "Scratching your HORN". Hmmm....how Freudian!

Bert Denzler used to make a great sound on the tenor by running his housekeys across the bell and keys of the instrument. Sounded great but looked daft - so he stopped doing it.
Dunno, the breathy hisses are already beginning to sound a bit dated to me. There's still a lot of mileage to cover playing real notes, imo. John Butcher's new Emanem solo being a fine case in point.

Exactly, Dan. That is my problem with Brian still pushing that old sepratist EAI line.
It just isn't new anymore, either! It never really was, there were whole pieces of just air through the horn and other wispy sounds at low volumes in '70s, on Fuchs/Scneider/Hübler's "Momente" lp, Lacy's duo with Altena and plenty of other places.
I am all for EAI but it will take a lot more than few years of sustained crackles and wispy sounds to negate all sounds that came before!
That new Butcher cd is incredible.

Damon, fair enough. Difficult to quantify except that, for myself, it isn't necessarily the explicit sounds themselves, but my sense that they're less being explored than being used as an effect. The second side of Braxton's "For Alto" does some amazing work in the soft, breathy registers, an incredible piece, but I always thought that stood out from quasi-similar efforts I heard by others though, of course, I've hardly heard anything, including the two you cite.

Haven't heard the new Butcher yet either, but would very much like two. He's still responsible for the finest solo sax concert I've scene in recent years. With him, for me, it's far less about the sounds and much more about the structure, especially what I pick up ans an implicit song form in my favorite work of his.

the "history laddenness" of the saxophone is indeed one of the more irrational traits of Olewniks belief system when in reality the sax is one of the historically youngest instruments out there

"Normal" sounds have always been a part of EAI, Dafeldecker's low Es, Stangl's beautiful jazz chords. I don't see why saxophones should be any different.
Brian, the Lacy/Altena duo is a must have, you can find it around or maybe someone can get you a copy, it is fantastic. Momente is harder to find, I have not even seen an mp3 rip around but it is another good one.

"a thorough understanding of what has transpired in the last decade or so of contemporary improvisation can do these days?"

- This sentence is more separatist bullshit. A lot of different things have happened in the last decade of contemporary improvisation.
Listen to what you want, but don't try to rewrite history.
The best "contemporary improvisation" album I have heard this year is the new Betram Turetzky/Wolfgang Fuchs duo.
They use all sorts of sounds and make incredible music without worrying whether or not the EAI gods would approve.
I heard a duo earlier this year of Steve Adams and Vinny Golia that was as fresh and happening as anything in the erstwhile catalog and it was mostly pitch and harmony.

The danger of the agenda you push is musicians end up making music that has to do with fitting in and not the best music that can be made with the resources at hand.
You are fine writer but the sooner you grow up and drop the competive school yard agena the better for all of us.

EAI is just one part of a bigger approach to music. How it relates to the whole body of improvised music is a lot more intersting than how it (supposedly) negates the rest of it.

Damon I honestly don't see Brian trying to rewrite history in any way.

As I read it he merely said that he prefers to hear new ground broken with the sax, and that the clicking and popping of keys is something that he has heard many times before from previous generations of musicians.

You said "a lot of different things have happened in the last decade of contemporary improvisation". Well I don't see anything in Brian's words to suggest that he feels this is not the case. In fact he clearly agrees, and one of those "different things" is the clicking and popping of keys that he has a problem with, and I personally find very uninteresting these days as well.

Is Brian pushing an agenda? If he is then I am sure he is surprised to hear that his words have that power to make musician's change their music so that it "fits in"

I'd actually argue as well that if the agenda you fear actually exists and really had this amazing power then it would encourage people to keep trying to find new approaches rather than resort to old ones. I'm not really sure how that could be construed as "making people try and fit in".

Of course EAI is one part of a bigger approach to improvisation. I really do not see anyone that needs to be told that here. However Brian happens to think that EAI is the most interesting area of improvisation right now, so do I, maybe you don't. Thats all I see him expressing though, an opinion, he isn't rewriting anything. Your words just read as an angry riposte to something that isn't there.

To many of us, all commonly used sounds, methods and techniques will begin to sound "dated" over time. These include the sounds that have become recognisable as belonging to EAI. I am currently halfway through an essay on this subject right now, so its in the forefront of my mind.

Of course you cannot "negate" what has happened in the past, but you can certainly build on it and stretch outwards. Indeed this is only one way of making interesting music, and music that does not attempt this does not suddenly become "bad" in any way, but for some people (and we all get different things from music) this continual search of new ways of using sound as a means of expression is very interesting.

All week I have been playing Malignitat, the new disc by Taku Unami, a musician that is challenging what has become the norm within EAI. On much of the release one of the "instruments" used is an extended sample of a helicopter. This sound is instantly recognisable, sounds completely out of place on a CD (its use is far from ironic) and challenges what the listener might expect to hear.

I wouldn't say that Unami is trying to negate anything that has gone before either, merely challenge the listener to understand new sounds and structures in music, playing with their expectations.

Meanwhile a lot more music is being made. Some of it totally reliant on music made in the past, some not. Just because I (or Brian) find what Unami is doing to be very interesting does not mean there isn't plenty of value to be had from other areas.

As for the Turetzky / Fuchs disc I haven't heard it. Why not write a review of it for Bags Damon? I'd be interested to read your opinion, why you think its so good. I have seen Fuchs live a couple of times and enjoyed both occasions, but if I have anything on disc I don't remember it.

"Dude, that dotted-8th/16th rhythm is SO 1805."

I have to question the value of discussing a given instrumental technique as "music" when it is not music, it's a technique and, as part of a piece of music, exists in a very particular context. Remove it from the context, and how much information does it convey about the musician or their approach?

I never really had a problem with people using techniques or sounds that are 'dated', they're all just parts of the palette that the musicians have open to them, but I do think that the continual need to be playing something 'new' can be very constricting - possibly producing works of a limited scope and/or depth of relevance? [one of the problems I always had with contemporary composition -- too much like a fashion....]

Damon mentioned Lacy and I think he's an excellent example of a musician with huge ears who absorbed information from many different sources, including eai (AMM and his participation in MEV) and channeled what he learned into his own idiosyncratic music. He didn't just know these various musics, he understood them (I think). When he subsequently created his own work, especially the solo music, I think it was different, richer, than it would have been otherwise if, say, he'd limited his influence to a single tradition. I can't quantify this, I don't pretend I can, but (for instance) I don't think the pieces on "Clinkers" would have been the same had he not known Rzewski's music, had he not hung a mic outside his window and played along, etc. I last saw him perform (solo) about four years ago, long after eai was my main interest and I loved him as much as ever, playing tunes on that soprano.

So I'd be less interested in a sax quartet that built only on WSQ, for example. Others may find that perfectly acceptable. As Richard ably pointed out (thanks, Richard!) an "agenda" has nothing to do with it; I'm just stating my preferences. Within this tiny subset of music, there exists an even smaller contingent of listeners who apparently use my evaluation as one (out of many, I trust) signpost that signifies, "Hmmm...maybe I'll like this as well." That's all.

Though our tastes overlap a certain amount, Damon's and mine (within this tiny sphere) often don't. What I've heard of Golia, for instance (and I've heard him since a Nine Winds release from around '79), I've never enjoyed as much as I've thought I would; reading about him long ago, he struck e as someone I'd be into but it never clicked for me. Perhaps my loss, perhaps we just enjoy different things. No problem with me.

Tom, good point. Certain techniques, though, carry connotations on their own, I think you'd allow. Even here, I mentioned that, given my initial put-offedness, the quartet placed the plosives well, in context.

"Betram Turetzky/Wolfgang Fuchs"

Hey Damon,

where can I get this/what label is it on? I have seen Turetzky and Fuchs in duo before. Must be a motherfucker of a CD.

Fuchs in general I think is terrific. I just finally got "Six Fuchs" the other day on the basis of it getting four stars in Penguin. Outstanding.

P.S. I agree with you on Holz fuer Europa

I got it from Turetzky, I am not sure who is distributing it. It is awesome.

As far as Brian's agenda, those who read his reviews regularly all know what he really means by the sentence I quoted above.
We know what "the last decade of contemporary imporvised music" does and does not include in his opinion.

It is obvious enought that you shouldn't be so cowardly about it when called on it.
Backtracking and calling it "personal taste" is irresponsible. Your writing is important, it has an impact, it is part of the history and you should be more responsible with it.

Damon, I think you're *way* overstating any purported importance on my part, but otherwise, we'll just have to disagree as to my motives.

Walto, while it's generally true I don't go out of my way to offend (where's the sense in that?), I also recognize that most issues, political or aesthetic, are far more complicated than can be sloganeered in a sentence. Stridency had never struck me as a virtue.

"I don't think the pieces on "Clinkers" would have been the same had he not known Rzewski's music, had he not hung a mic outside his window and played along, etc. I last saw him perform (solo) about four years ago, long after eai was my main interest and I loved him as much as ever, playing tunes on that soprano."

Yeah, but see, they way that reads to me is that you would have loved him even more had he not had that deep understanding of Monk's music.

Your reading comprehension is as stellar as ever, Uli.

"Walto, while it's generally true I don't go out of my way to offend (where's the sense in that?), I also recognize that most issues, political or aesthetic, are far more complicated than can be sloganeered in a sentence. Stridency had never struck me as a virtue."

You're absolutely right. My post was unfair, and kind of nasty to boot. I'm going to delete it.

It's a bit embarrasing to read all this.

It [i]does[/i] feel like some sort of decorum is developing, a zealous urgency to avoid the old.

[i]The first portion of second track gives me a bit of a problem, essentially because a large proportion of the sounds are key pops and other plosives, elements that carry a wee bit too much of that baggage from prior generations of free reedists.[/i]

I dunno, I don't think Brian has some sort of hidden agenda, and of course it's just probably him prefering new grounds to be broken. I love newness as well, that's not the point, but still, a passage like that kinda creeps me out, and I can't put my finger on the why.

ok Ollie, I am nearly convinced. If you can give me a reasonable explanation why you would have guessed a sax quartet to be a played out format anymore than say a string quartet you may have pushed me to the point of purchase.

Schick, let me make a (gross) analogy: If you heard a fuzz-drenched guitar playing archetypal 80s, hair-metal, power chords, it would probably, in the instant you heard it, summon up certain connotations, good or bad depending on your taste. While it would be unfair to judge the entire piece in which it's embedded from those few seconds, it's unavoidable to make some connections (at least for me; maybe others are better at this). I think this happens automatically--we hear something and immediately, for the moment, begin to categorize it, to relate it to similar moments from the past.

If there's some sound element which, in one's experience, you've found indicative of a kind of fallback position (or what you perceive to be so), that's going to figure into it, at least at first. Hopefully, you modify that opinion in the context of the entire piece. However, and perhaps this is a failing, that initial reaction might leave something of a tinge.

Uli, not sure if I used the term "played out", but if I did, that's a mistake. Certainly, no instrument or grouping of instruments can be played out. Buy it and see what you think.

Brian - the phrase 'creeps me out' is too harsh in retrospect. I understand where you are coming from, and such judgements are indeed unavoidable, but in a way, I dunno, are said sounds really a fallback position? Particulary since the hisses, the feedback, the scraping, etc. are not really new either.

I've been listening to 'ij' lately, and one could as easily say that Nakamura falls back on a position he has been maintaining the lost couple of years. People would object to such a statement and say : it is the interaction, the context, the slight differences, etc. Well : what about the interaction, context & slight differences in the key pops on Propagations?

As I posted on JC this morning regarding a violin and tabla concerto by someone named Korde, if something seems very derivative to somebody, he/she's probably not going to blown away by it. That may be some sort of fundamental law of psychology or something.

Schick, I think those are good points and it may be simply a matter of certain sounds (or sound groups) having one effect on one listener (perhaps due to their own prior experience) and a different effect on another. I had been thinking about, for lack of a better term, breathy reed playing. I'm sure we've all heard the general technique used dozens, if not hundreds of times. But for me, there's more "room" inside that approach for an enduring interest than there is in that of the key-taps.

Ultimately, as Djll pointed out earlier, it's about the music and context, not a given technique though, as I implied above, you are dealing with events over time and that sequence will be made up of numerous instantaneous impressions, some of which may leave traces.

"I dunno, I don't think Brian has some sort of hidden agenda, and of course it's just probably him prefering new grounds to be broken."

Most of the music he likes was groundbreaking 10 years ago.
EAI doesn't have "newness" to latch onto anymore than any other genre. It takes the same level of creativity to make a screaming free jazz solo or soft hisses through the horn relavent these days.

"Damon, I think you're *way* overstating any purported importance on my part, but otherwise, we'll just have to disagree as to my motives."

- I think you are underestimating your importance. If you dropped the dismissive remarks about music outside your focus you would be able to get across the good points of the work you love to more listeners more effectively.

Damon noone in this thread has said that "soft hisses through a horn" are in any way "new", so why are you putting up an argument against that? You have simpified what Brian and I have said here down into one sentence that we would probably both agree with.

That said, having FOUR saxophone players all approaching their instrument from different angles, from the semi traditional to some of the completely un-saxophone sounds that Rives generates here (have you heard this disc by the way? If you know of anyone that makes close to the sounds Rives manages with a sax I'd love to be pointed in their direction) is a little more unusual. All Brian said, was whilst he enjoyed the abstraction of the music that sounded very little like saxophones he didn't enjoy the part where someone reverted to a far more recognisable sound. he is entitled to say that. he didn't make any "dismissive" remarks, he merely said what he felt didn't work on the album for him particularly.

As for their being no more "newness to latch on to in EAI than any other genre" well I agree, once something is considered a genre its probably just about done everything its going to do. I still don't think its that settled yet though, and there are some very vibrant and innovative things happening around the fringes of the music right now.

Near the end of last week's audition show we played a track from Taku Unami's new album Malignitat. You can hear the show here: http://www.auditionradio.info/audition%20audio%20files/audition%20Show51.mp3 I'd be really interested to know if you've heard it. Its probably the most original piece of music I've heard this year and to some degree I think it can be described as "new". I'm interested to hear your thoughts on it.

This one has not shown up yet, I am waiting for it. I really wish more labels would get their digital distribution together, it would be great to go to emusic and get this right now.
I have not checked out Unami at all. Sounds like I should.

Out of interest what format/bitrate do emusic use? Propogations would suffer pretty badly from any level of compression IMO. Until wide bandwidth is cheaper and easier to work with I can't see any of the big online companies supporting lossless formats.

People say that, but I use the highest quality and barely hear a difference.
It already suffered pretty badly when it went to cd.
Certainly less of an objectional difference than LP to CD.
The labels who think that way are just fooling themselves.

It really isn't their decision to make anymore, their only decision is if they want to possibility of getting paid or not.

It is like busking, you can put a hat out - or not.
More than likely they just think it will be tough to do when it could not be easier.
http://iodalliance.com/
Is incredible and does all the work for you.

I am not saying we can stop making cds, but I for one rarely keep them.
Amoeba has 75% back policy so when I buy one I rip it to the highest quality mp3 and take it back.
If I want a Hi-fi listening experience I put on an LP.
I only kept one cd I bought recently and it was TOPOS because it was just so beautiful and detailed.

I used to think I couldn't hear the difference between Mp3 and lossless Damon. I really wanted that to be the case, but over the years too many occasions have lead me to think otherwise.

There have been two instances very recently connected to audition. On one recent show we played Rhodri Davies' new album Over Shadows, a piece for ebows on harp that utilises the beating patterns caused by two or more continual tones crossing. Even at a 192 bitrate a lot of the subtlety of the music disappeaed and I regretted playing it. It was a different record.

Also a week or two back we made a mistake whilst broadcasting, left a mic channel open for a second or two and our off-air conversation went out underneath a piece of music. We (fortunately) were only discussing timings, but I took the moment out of the Mp3 file that went up on our website. The thing is, we weren't sure if what we said was audible or not at the time, so when I got home I first checked the 128kpbs rip of the radio stream I made. Although a voice was evident it was distant and broken up, you couldn't hear what was said.

However when I later began to edit the WAV file taken directly from the studio the voices were clear and every word could be understood, the difference was dramatic.

As for LPs well to me they sound so bad I gave away my turntable years ago, but thats an old boring subject.

I run a CD label. Personally if I ever went digital I would never release the music I put out at anything less than a lossless file. Even if the difference in quality is only slight I wouldn't accept that. If the music is worth releasing its worth treating with complete respect.

As for getting paid well that is a complete irrelevance in my area of music anyway. I don't make money releasing CDs, I wouldn't with download only releases either.
The only choice I have to make is one of how much I want to lose, and I'm afraid until every household has a computer with wide enough broadband and big enough memory to handle lossless files the choice is an easy one.

Oh, there is a difference, but not enough of one that you don't get the idea behind the music.
My point is this: releases should be available on cd and available for download these days because they are available anyway.

I think there are a lot of people out there who want mp3s but don't want to steal them.
Let them pay you.

I got a couple checks this year for mp3s of my catalog that make a believer out of me.

The other point is, you can't control what people listen on, how they listen what they listen on. Releasing cds does not keep people from ripping it to mp, making people buy the cd just to do that is an unnecessary expense.

You release the cd, and the mp3, people know the difference,
and they will make their own decisions.

Damon I believe as a label owner it is my job to release music in the best feasible format, treating with the complete respect I believe it deserves. If people want to make lossy rips of the CDs for their own purposes so be it, but I personally won't release music with the quality compromised.

I think its inevitable that some day my label like many others will move to download only, but I'll only do that with lossless files.

Anyway, this is way off topic.

Well, it is actually very on topic for any release out there now. I am label owner myself.
I see your point, but I don't think with that attitude labels can be surprised or upset when someone downloads their releases for free through the numerous avenues avaiable.

Like it or not, you (and others) are trying to hold ground you have already lost, you may as well get a few $$ from it....

So you are saying it becomes morally OK to download music illegally because the label didn't release a lower quality version of it in the first place? Something twisted there to me.

Sure the ground was lost long ago, but I still retain the right to be upset about the situation. its not about money as there's no money to be made here anyway. The fact that lower quality formats, without sleeve art, without liner notes, often with corruptions, missing tracks, wrongly ordered tracks are these days the most common way of obtaining music is depressing.

Yes I am aware that with a legal download system some of the above can be included, but I think its already evident that the pay-for-mp3 model doesn't work, at least for this area of music, and again I don't believe its currently a satisfactory way of presenting new music to the world.

I'm done with this side issue now. Back to Propagations.

I did not invent Ipods or mp3s, but that is quickly becoming the standard now, like it or not.
Fixating on the quality is not the issue, it is not the best that is our situation now.
Some of us want cds, others don't but still want the music.
I am not trying to justify the morality, I am just pointing out the hard facts, people want mp3s for now and they will pay for them, if you won't sell it to them, they might get it another way.

I used to use all the same excuses you put out there, I am just pointing out how it is.

I pay for lots of mp3s every month, and I get paid for mine, the pay for mp3s only does not work if you refuse to sell them.

I'd love to get back to Propgations, but the distrubutors have not gotten it here yet, the instant worldwide distribution is the upside of mp3s, the quality is the down side.

Sounds like maybe y’all should just agree to disagree. Personally, I hate the intangibility of mp3s and will continue to buy cds as long as the format exists. There’s just something about having a physical associative object to go along with the sounds. Sure, the music itself is also intangible, but its nice to have the peripheral stuff & packaging in professional form to go along with it.

As Richard noted, this music (improv) has never really been about the money anyway. The odds of breaking even on a release are scant so why not put your satisfaction as a producer (and being true to your artists’ intentions) ahead of that of the consumer? I see nothing wrong with that in a situation like this.

My point is Richard's (and everyone else's) entire catalog is already widely availble in that format, and he should wake up start getting paid for it, because labels do take money to run.
Were that not the case I would agree with him 100%.
The two issues with not having mp3s in addition to cds are:

1. you criminalize listeners who want that format because they get it elsewhere.
2. you lose money that people are happy to give you.

It is only attitude's like this that keep releases from breaking even or making money.

BTW, I am not by any means suggesting anyone go download only.
Most digital distributors want legit cd labels at this point.
You do both it is not either or.

Point taken, Damon. But I don’t read Richard as grousing about not getting paid. His point, as I read it, is that he would rather steer clear of mp3s entirely and offer the music in a format that (in his opinion) best represents the musicians’ work. I don’t see the problem with the owner of an inherently money-losing venture switching gears and putting the consumer second to his own interests/preferences. You obviously disagree.

Earlier today, I typed up a big blog post ruminating on mp3 culture and how I believe it’s contributing to the general disposability of music writ large. Even picked out a nifty image to go with it. I ended up deleting it since the argument struck me as obvious & moot upon a second reading.

Nobody can steer clear of mp3s. Any worthwhile release is already out there on mp3.
That is why it is so important for the labels and musicians to try get at least some control of it.

Mp3s don't change much. You can get the music faster and put more into a smaller space, you do lose some quality.
I always have the cover art.
I have 1000s of cds and 1000s of lps - not adding more in my small apt. a is a good thing.

As far as the object argument goes, a full 80 or 160 gig ipod trumps any pacaking I have ever seen.
For me it also got to be a problem when I started collecting high end art catalogs, they take up more space, but give a far better visual experience.

Damon, you’re typing right past my point (& Richard’s, I think).

Richard can “steer clear” of mp3s by not releasing the music on his label in that format. I can “steer clear” of them by choosing not to download them. Will they still exist? Of course. Will vast numbers of people continue to download them with or without paying for them? Definitely. But at least neither of us will be directly contributing to their agency. Is that an ostritch defense to the phenomena? Probably. But I think it works in this case.

It doesn’t work in relation to your own preferences. You’ve made that clear. As far as getting at least some control over the downloading situation... that’s a noble goal, but I think the argument can also be made that it really comes down to the ethics of the consumer. In other words, if a label owner and/or musician chooses to release their product in a specific format for personal reasons, doesn’t the onus fall on the responsible consumer to respect that choice? Many (maybe even most) consumers could care less, but there are those (I'm assuming you're among them) who do respect the owner's/artist's intentions and choices.

actually derek, damon isn't typing past your point at all. and no, richard isn't steering clear of mp3s by not making them available. when you release music, it ends up on mp3. there is no option of steering clear.

read his two cogent points again:

1. you criminalize listeners who want that format because they get it elsewhere.
2. you lose money that people are happy to give you.

the defense that richard's (or any) label is more concerned with the artists and the product than the consumer is horribly self-defeating: why release it all then? why not make it a private run item?
if it's not released for the consumer who is it released for?

I see it differently, Sam. Please read my posts again if that's unclear. The point is that Richard is opting not to enter into the mp3 format himself & thereby "steering clear" of it. What others do with what he releases is ultimately out of his control. I don't think it's "self defeating" to work off the assumption that some listeners/consumers will accept/respect the format the label owner/musician chooses to release the music in. As I noted above, some will, a vast number of others won't. A person can purchase a cd and burn/rip it into whatever format they wish. It's not a difficult process.

As far as who it's released for, I can't speak for Richard (even though I seem to be doing that a lot here, sorry, Richard), but if it were me & I owned a label that was not intended as a profit-earning venture from the get-go, my principal concerns would be towards catering to the intentions of the musicians whose work I was releasing, and in conjunction, my own tastes. The consumers & their preferences would come second. If that seems "horribly self-defeating" then so be it. I don't see it as such. I think you sell listeners short by suggesting that their consumerist preferences should necessarily trump the artists' intentions & choices. It's about getting the music out there in the format/fidelity intended. Moving units and making a profit are of secondary importance in this case.

there is no disjunction between catering to artists intentions and releasing mp3s unless the artists say they are explicitly against it - is that the case?

Some artists want to work in some formats and others in others and some in all and some in few. Some people think their CD cases/packaging are art and some see art in MP3s, some release without such an obsession over graphic design. There are a lot of hands in the pot directing what art is being produced outside of the art itself. They are so intertwined at times that it isn't a release in any typical 'release date' sense. Art is music and releases are art and some make music as a release in mind and some release music as an ideal. Some are documents. Some are books. Some releases in one format later distributed in another format aren’t the same release anymore. Some compliment, some dominate. Etc., etc.

The business of it is a decision and as a label, you can't expect to change the growing trends. If you want to and can't compete in the marketplace, you never should blame the customers for your failure. That is an insult to yourself for all the bad labels that succeed. Bad being a general term for those you see less than you--and, of course, if no one is below you, you are pretty low and should probably worry about yourself over releasing 'music.' Well, unless it is your own which I don’t believe has been proven to help anyone with any serious illness but has proven to enlighten a few who aren't so misfortunate.

I thought I stated my position pretty clearly, but perhaps not. Richard’s against releasing the music on his label because he feels it compromises the sonic integrity of the music. I’m assuming the artists on his label share his opinion, though maybe not. I think the scale and nature of the market we’re discussing here should also be noted. It’s not like we’re talking about Radiohead’s In Rainbows. I personally doubt Richard is losing much “business” due to his releases not being available in downloadable form. As he and others have opined, it’s an area of music where the degradation of fidelity is not only particularly noticeable, but harmful. Top that off with his statement that his label isn’t a profit-oriented venture to begin with.

Again, part of the disconnect here might be that we’re discussing different things. Sam and Damon seem to be extrapolating Richard’s situation to the larger music industry, but it’s a bit like apples & oranges, IMO. Cathnor is just a microscopic fragment of that macrocosm and therefore, I think, different rules apply.

Hey, Richard, where’d you go? I got into similar trouble attempting to speak for Brian a week or two ago. I need to step off the podium and give someone better qualified on this side of the debate the mic.

Richard is for sure lossing business. That is a hard fact. I used to have the exact same opinons he had, then I woke up.
I am a purist at heart - I'd love things to still be on lp, and to be able to play nothing but unamplified bass.
The Airlines, louder contexts and technology take things beyond my control.

I try make the best of the situation, I got a 7 string electric upright I can get on a plane without hassle of any kind, and since I was already plugging things in added a laptop with lloopp.
I can do some interesting and different things with it and I feel it is an acceptable response to the situation, I made something good out of it.

As for mp3s, I can have my whole catalog available without repressing since the first few releases are out of print and
I can get the music available worldwide at a reasonable price.
And every 6 months I get a decent check.

Back to the release at hand, yes the quality will suffer on mp3 to cd, but for me it is really suffering because the goddamn thing has not made it here yet, (FYI, RIchard, I waited months before I "saw" a copy of "Sight".).

So the pros of mp3s are:

Lable side:
1. Wider, better distribution
2. No Repressing costs - free money

Listener side:

1. No dealing with cd storage - at home and when traveling you can have a large chunk of your collection in your pocket
2. No dealing with the postal service/or waiting for a small label to get around to shipping your cds (I am guilty of this as well)
3. imediate accesss to the music you want
4. widely available OOP LP rips - no high ebay prices for a record that is just OK

Like my double bass situation, it is not quite ideal but it opens up different posibilities and it is not only a negative.

Finally, there are those want free music, and those who want mp3s, there is an overlap, but they are not the same, I am downloading the new Myra Melford/Mark Dresser trio form emusic now.

Hey Derek,

You're not alone in your opinions. I'm backing you up on this. Every post you've written on this pretty much coincides with my own thoughts. Damon already knows that I disagree with him on this issue. He argues it's the wave of the future. I personally am pretty disgusted by the whole mp3, ipod, etc. hegemony that seems to be occuring. Nothing against the technology itself, or the conscious and intelligent use of such - just horrified and offended by the seemingly unconscious viral effect it seems to be having on culture, were it seems almost overnight, it is now expected that you must have an ipod, mp3, downloadable horse-shit, cell phone, blackberry, laptop piece of fucking crap - and also noting everything that gets lost with each new "advance" in technology (professionalism, communitarianism, sound quality, not to mention lowering the bar for what is released when it becomes so easy to just upload download, etc.)

I wish you would have posted your mp3 rant blog. It may be obvious, maybe not, but in any case I imagine it would be a good read.

Cheers!

I was trying to let the conversation wander back to the CD supposedly under discussion Derek, but doesn't look like thats about to happen.

Damon, Sam , Ted, (and in particular Ted, what on earth was all that about?) thanks for your tips on how to make a profit and how to give consumers what they want, but neither of these things are particularly high up my list of priorities.

Cathnor is very much a hobby, a labour of love and an extension of myself as a listener. Its a simple fact that the music I release suffers audibly if listened to in Mp3 format. My release by Graham Halliwell and Tomas Korber in particular falls apart with any kind of compression. I am simply not prepared to release a substandard product.

Of course people will make their own Mp3 rips of the music and I have no problem with them doing so (though it should be clear that iPods do not necessarily mean Mp3, I have an 80GB player filled with lossless rips) My point is that when the music leaves me it leaves me in the best condition it can, how I would like to have received it if I was the purchaser.

Cathnor makes a big loss, as I always expected it to. I have no moral need to remain non-profit, its just highly unlikely that I could ever get into the black. The idea that Cathnor could make big profits from dual-releasing music as Mp3s alongside CDs is also pretty silly. I don't know anyone that would regularly pay for Mp3 quality downloads of this tiny area of music if a CD is also available. Sure they will download it and buy it later, but no way will more more than a tiny handful pay. It just wouldn't work.

The reality is this: people that want to download Mp3s of Cathnor music for free can do it very easily right now. Last time I looked all of my releases could be found at soulseek.
I have personal standards that I wish to uphold however and I couldn't care less if it was possible that I could make money by lowering them and I don't really care who I upset in the process, sorry.

Now I'm done here, and sorry to Jacques and the musicians for not discussing the great music reviewed above.

BTW, Damon. Where's my Mp3 royalties? Ha! Does that make me a hypcorite? Not really. Damon wants to put his label on MP3, that was fine with me. If I get money from that so much the better.

BUT, I also respect Richard's decision to not to downloads. I personally don't do any of that. I couldn't find "Sight" in the stores either, so I ordered it from Sound323. Does that mean I won't get it instantly? Of course. But waiting is an okay thing. There are more important things than instant gratification.

Pinnell, I am far from talking about how to make a profit but how to do what you want. Feel free to play as you will as all is game. I have no concern for consumers except myself. Why should I worry about what others care to listen to and what they want to pay for and what is relevant? I listen for myself and mine own ears. If a label needs to play the artist game in the name of graphic design, so be it. But don't tell me the music is any the better for it. The music will continue to exist and grow without labels. Your design, Pinnell, is what will mostly be forgotten in the terms of the music. As far as graphic design tradition continues, maybe someday you'll have a spread in Print or whatever the design folly parade is keeping up with the joneses through. I like my music on disc and it pleases my eye and something even in the touch but that doesn't mean I buy into every pleasantly created object for my consumption. The avant-garde has often been lost in this well-packaged item and often it becomes a commodity but, again, it has nothing to do with the tradition of the music. At least, it hasn't been so yet.

When did I mention the design??? What has design got to do with this conversation?

I disagree Ted. Music does not exist in a vaccuum. For better or worse, presentation DOES make a difference.

I haven't got my copy of Sight yet, but I do have the first Cathnor disc, and I think the packaging is great.

Damon, although on the other side of the debate, is also a big art fan and I know he thinks a lot about putting good art on his CDs, his theory being that any CD will spend a lot more time on the shelf, where you can see in visually, than in the CD player, SO MAKE IT LOOK GOOD.

The design has to do with your attitude about the releases. The attitude of the label, the presenter. Like the curator, etc. I know you are talking about sound quality. But look at how you present. Your personal best, your personal standards wouldn't allow such a catastrophe of releasing as compressed MP3s. The music is a bit louder than you think. Besides, not like you have been in the game for a considerable amount of time or anything. I wish you luck but I am sure the label is more to serve your own ego than how it relates to the specific music. Not that is necessarily a bad thing.

The packaging can be transferred to a computer screen, and potentially be bigger, better, more interactive there, so digital files can also look good. This conversation had nothing to do with the design though, my comments above all refer to the sound quality of the music format.

I should make it clear I am not against downloads as a format as such, only those that produce a soundfile that is more compressed than a CD. I can very easily see me one day releasing lossless files with digital artwork attached, initially alongside CDs, but eventually on their own. The move to digital distribution is inevitable eventually. Right now though lossless only downloads are impractical, but its only a matter of time.

The whole point Ted is that the music is NOT louder than I think once it is compressed. Try ripping The Large Glass (Korber/Halliwell) to a 192kpbs Mp3 and you will see that all I am doing is protecting the music. A big chunk of it disappears

Your stabs at my ego are insultingly wide of the mark, but I personally don't care what you think. I know for sure that I don't make personal insults at people I've never met and don't really know in online forums anyway.

I should also say that the curator comment is well wide of the mark as well. I have never asked for anything to be changed to any of the music I have ever released or plan to release. I have also never commisioned music. I don't believe this is my role.
I have listened to this music for many years and Cathnor is just an extension of that, giving something back. i didn't even mention the name of the label here until after Derek did. I hear music I like and would like to be more involved with, end of story.

I guess the last question is whether your musicians mind the only mp3 option being illegal free download, you might be independently wealthy but I am sure they could use the few hundred $$ or Euros or pounds or whatever online sales will generate.

We seem to be going round and round in circles here lads. God knows where you get your "few hundred $" from Damon; in my "career" as an improvising musician I've never received any single royalty cheque big enough to pay for a taxi ride across town to celebrate it with a steak frites at La Coupole (in homage to Nicolas de Stael). Not mention pay for the steak. In fact, the only decent royalties that have ever come my way date from my 1997 studio session with a French rock group and a two minute cameo appearance on Luc Ferrari's Far West News.
So I'm certainly not in it for the money.
As far as sound quality and the eternal compress or not compress debate ( by now I'm sure you'll all have read this one
http://www.stylusmagazine.com/articles/weekly_article/imperfect-sound-forever.htm
but if you haven't, do so), it finally comes down to a matter of choice. Of course, there's a lot of music out there that needs a proper set of loudspeakers and considerable volume to work AT ALL - e.g. Niblock, Sachiko M, Radigue, Lucier, Tsunoda etc etc - but if you're daft enough to want to listen to Jetsun Mila as an mp3 in a crowded subway train that's your business (I should point out that I am daft enough to listen to Jetsun Mila as an mp3 in a crowded subway train and I did so yesterday and it blended rather agreeably with the engine noise.. though it's better late at night at home). Hell, if you want to rub off your ancient Memorex cassette of Bob Dylan's Greatest Hits and re-record Richard's Korber release on top and play the result on a battered old beatbox, you can. I envy you Richard for living in an environment quiet enough to appreciate the nuances in frequency that you talk about; I imagine most of us reading this don't, though. Anyway I'm off to Orly airport, where, as you will recall, Chris Marker filmed La Jetée, so maybe I should take a copy of the magnificent Sirr compilation "Sul dedicated to Chris Marker" http://www.sirr-ecords.com/cat/006sul.html to listen to on my trusty mp3 player as the planes roar overhead..

I got a few hundred for back catalog mp3s from IODA this year, I imagine Richard's releases would do as well or better.
One key thing we with smaller labels are not acustom to is the extremely wide net digital distribution casts.

I have also gotten a couple very decent royalty checks this year from the Weasel Walter Quartet release I am on.
I have never understood the attidute that improviesd music can't at least pay for itself, if not turn a smalll profit.

I am not under any cirumstances trying to say mp3s are as good as cd quality, I just see them as the current reality and try to find the positives.

As a musician I really appreciate where Richard is coming from, and would like to thank him for fighting the good fight. BUT...

CDs are a pain in the arse. They were once a necessary evil, but that's rarely the case anymore. The sooner lossless compression renders them obsolete, the better.

I once thought that the majority of people would prefer the artifact that is the lp or cd to the downloaded file. I was wrong--both about the majority of people, and about myself. The cd is well on its way to being the new pet rock: an intrinsically value-less item tarted-up by fancy packaging. It's a waste of physical resources, and should be abandoned as soon as is feasible.

Thanks, Richard. You said better what I was attempting to say in your stead.

I am not under any cirumstances trying to say mp3s are as good as cd quality, I just see them as the current reality and try to find the positives.

No arguments from me on this, Damon. Sounds like sound perspective.

Good points too, Fred. Cds are a colossal consumer of physical resources, personal space, etc. Even with all the obvious negatives though, I’m still attracted to the physical object over the intagible digital entity. Hopefully that will change w/ time as lossless downloads become more pervasive.

Jacob, my rant really wasn’t worth the pixels, but I do appreciate the kind word. I was thinking about what Damon wrote regarding “instant gratification” and that really encapsulates the double-edged nature of mp3 proliferation. On the one hand, there’s instant access to pretty much anything. A few clicks will get you whatever your looking for and usually at no direct out-of-pocket cost. The downside to that is the disposability factor and the “on to the next thing” credo that comes with it. And tied into that is the age old Tootsie Pop question: how many listens does it take to get to the center of a recording? Quantity versus quality, etc. A case in point for me is the scads of oop free jazz LPs I pulled from various blogs late last year. To date, I’ve only listened repeatedly to a small handful and a large chunk are simply collecting virtual dust in the virtual attic that is my hard drive.

I think your listening set up is key. The first Ipod I ever got was an 80 gig video ipod, I was tried of taking cds on trips and tired of getting low-balled when I sold used cds at Amoeba, especally with half the improv cds being imports.
A smaller ipod wouldn't have made the impression the big one did, as I said before having it full of music and a few of my favorite movies as well a good selection video art from http://www.ubu.com can trump even the sexiest packaging.

Though I did pony up for this: http://www.efi.group.shef.ac.uk/labels/explico/explico15.html

I have my laptop plugged into my stereo at home, so it sounds quite good.
I have had very little change in my listening habits, just that I am able to get MORE of the music I want with less hassle.
For someone like me who listens to a lot of music, it really helps with cost and storage.
I still spend a fair amount of money (3 real cds today) but it is a bit less. I am fine with paying for music, so that has never been part of it.
For me SLSK is a last resort for in print releases - the few times I have done it means the label is so lax in getting it's distribution (meaning physical and digital) together they clearly do not care, so why should I?

As far as ethics goes, that last setence about sums it up, at a certain point listeners cannot babysit adults who can't bother to care for their own music, and it is hard to call it stealing when they refuse to sell it.

I for one, am more than happy to pay.

I think your listening set up is key. The first Ipod I ever got was an 80 gig video ipod, I was tried of taking cds on trips and tired of getting low-balled when I sold used cds at Amoeba, especally with half the improv cds being imports.
A smaller ipod wouldn't have made the impression the big one did, as I said before having it full of music and a few of my favorite movies as well a good selection video art from http://www.ubu.com can trump even the sexiest packaging.

Though I did pony up for this: http://www.efi.group.shef.ac.uk/labels/explico/explico15.html

I have my laptop plugged into my stereo at home, so it sounds quite good.
I have had very little change in my listening habits, just that I am able to get MORE of the music I want with less hassle.
For someone like me who listens to a lot of music, it really helps with cost and storage.
I still spend a fair amount of money (3 real cds today) but it is a bit less. I am fine with paying for music, so that has never been part of it.
For me SLSK is a last resort for in print releases - the few times I have done it means the label is so lax in getting it's distribution (meaning physical and digital) together they clearly do not care, so why should I?

As far as ethics goes, that last setence about sums it up, at a certain point listeners cannot babysit adults who can't bother to care for their own music, and it is hard to call it stealing when they refuse to sell it.

I for one, am more than happy to pay.

I think your listening set up is key. The first Ipod I ever got was an 80 gig video ipod, I was tried of taking cds on trips and tired of getting low-balled when I sold used cds at Amoeba, especally with half the improv cds being imports.
A smaller ipod wouldn't have made the impression the big one did, as I said before having it full of music and a few of my favorite movies as well a good selection video art from http://www.ubu.com can trump even the sexiest packaging.

Though I did pony up for this: http://www.efi.group.shef.ac.uk/labels/explico/explico15.html

I have my laptop plugged into my stereo at home, so it sounds quite good.
I have had very little change in my listening habits, just that I am able to get MORE of the music I want with less hassle.
For someone like me who listens to a lot of music, it really helps with cost and storage.
I still spend a fair amount of money (3 real cds today) but it is a bit less. I am fine with paying for music, so that has never been part of it.
For me SLSK is a last resort for in print releases - the few times I have done it means the label is so lax in getting it's distribution (meaning physical and digital) together they clearly do not care, so why should I?

As far as ethics goes, that last setence about sums it up, at a certain point listeners cannot babysit adults who can't bother to care for their own music, and it is hard to call it stealing when they refuse to sell it.

I for one, am more than happy to pay.

at a certain point listeners cannot babysit adults who can't bother to care for their own music, and it is hard to call it stealing when they refuse to sell it.

You lost me again, Damon, but hey, that’s okay.

"and it is hard to call it stealing when they refuse to sell it."

Interesting theory. Remind me never to tell you where I live. ;>}

I guess my point there is that the labels and musicians are not just innocent victims in all this, and they have a certain amount of responsibilty in caring for their own music and making sure it is availble to those who want it, and must accept the consequences of the choices they make.

A good example is the Maya Homburger/Walter Prati/Barry Guy cd I looked for forever, I emailed the label, their distributor and Guy and Maya and no one had a copy to sell me, someone sent me a cdr of it and I didn't feel bad about it at all, same with OOP lp rips.

The thing that does bother me about mp3s, and that derek alludes to above, is that they encourage a wider breadth of listening, but not depth. People listen to more, different things, but they dont listen to individual albums many times. If I was 17 years old and just discovered improv or whatever - of course i'd immediatley want to listen to the entire FMP back catalog. But there is a kind of listening that disappears when you aren't limited (or even encouraged) to listen to what you, or a friend, can find.

yes i'm a grizzled old man, and even though i support making mp3s available, i dont own an ipod. they encourage a marginalization of music that i dont like. that doens't mean they require it - damon's a great example of someone who has made the device his own.

the glut and the ipod work hand in hand

and Damon - where did you find that explico action? they've got several releases I'd like but I've only had luck buying them in person from the musicians, and none of those guy seem to be coming my way...who distributes them?

tahnks.

"A good example is the Maya Homburger/Walter Prati/Barry Guy cd I looked for forever, I emailed the label, their distributor and Guy and Maya and no one had a copy to sell me, someone sent me a cdr of it and I didn't feel bad about it at all, same with OOP lp rips. "

Well in all honesty Damon I don't think you could find one person reading this that would feel bad about that example. Seems a perfectly reasonable response after all that effort to me.

You have to email Christmann for it, he is good about sending them out. The contact is on the Euro improv label page.

Damon Smith "I guess the last question is whether your musicians mind the only mp3 option being illegal free download, you might be independently wealthy but I am sure they could use the few hundred $$ or Euros or pounds or whatever online sales will generate."

I think you overestimate the sales in eai these days. Few hundred quid? Per musician?

And if Richard was independently wealthy he could afford some nicer clothes too :)

I prefer ogg vorbis.

"Damon Smith "I guess the last question is whether your musicians mind the only mp3 option being illegal free download, you might be independently wealthy but I am sure they could use the few hundred $$ or Euros or pounds or whatever online sales will generate."

I think you overestimate the sales in eai these days. Few hundred quid? Per musician?

And if Richard was independently wealthy he could afford some nicer clothes too :)"

Well, not for MIMIEO but maybe for the Large Glass. Granted I have 12 releases in my catalog and I am using myself as an example on both sides - listener and label owner.

MP3s are cheaper and faster so people are more likely to take a chance.
So when Thomas Korber gets a write up in the Wire people will download his music if it is available, where they may not bother to order from sound 323 or direct.

Only recently there was a musician I was sour on, but someone brought up a release that they said another great release was similar to so I went to emusic and downloaded from emusic it out of curiosity, I would never have bought the cd.

Yeah, oggs sound good, I get the Leo stuff I want in ogg, but I have to convert them for the ipod.

"A good example is the Maya Homburger/Walter "Prati/Barry Guy cd I looked for forever, I emailed the label, their distributor and Guy and Maya and no one had a copy to sell me, someone sent me a cdr of it and I didn't feel bad about it at all, same with OOP lp rips. "

Well in all honesty Damon I don't think you could find one person reading this that would feel bad about that example. Seems a perfectly reasonable response after all that effort to me.

I don't know. The claim that the creator loses any rights he/she may have once had by, perhaps, trying to restrict distribution of his/her work (or because it's somehow just become more restricted) seems strange to me.

Anyhow, I think that's a complicated question, and that there might be disagreement on what (if anything) makes bootlegging OK. I'd have to think more about it before taking a position myself.

I wouldn't say that the creator loses any rights Walto, and I am assuming that Damon would pick up a copy if he ever saw one. I think most of us would settle for a CDR copy of something if move every mountain the real thing cannot be found. This still infringes on the musician's rights but my point was that most people would not have a problem in this situation.

Rights and reality are two different things these days. Remember I am on both sides of this.
If you want to restrict your music these days, you best not release it at all because we just have less control of it anymore.

"If you want to restrict your music these days, you best not release it at all because we just have less control of it anymore."

That's probably true, but it's different from the claim that nobody minds about that being the case.

"Rights and reality are two different things."

Exactly.

Sure, there are plenty of negatives.
Still, worse case scenario is not someone stealing your music but someone not caring at all.

One of the few positives is that I would have heard this album by now!
I did get the recent Emanems and the new Erstwhile (very good) but no sign of the this one yet.

Since this thread morphed into the digital music debate, I wanted to pose one more question:
Why did the used cd/lp market never come under the same fire as file sharing?
The artists and labels get the same from either: nothing (or another person hearing their music, which I personally find valuable).
Is it because someone is making a buck? Even if it is the seller and the record store?
Anyway, it is one more thing to add to the equasion.

I'd imagine because the two aren't really comparable. When you sell a CD or LP you are reselling the original copy that you paid for, which a person is legally at liberty to do. With filesharing you are making a copy of the work and then passing that on. The nearest comparison from days gone by would have to be cassette tape bootlegging, where the original copy stays with the purchaser.

The problem suually arises when the work is replicated rather than just sold.

Damon asked: Why did the used cd/lp market never come under the same fire as file sharing?

Partly because of what Richard says above and partly because it was not seen as having a major financial impact on the industry. At various points in time the entertainment industry wanted to ban cassettes and the VCR because of piracy concerns. The compromise seems to have been taxing the purchase of the physical media used to make the potentially illicit copies.