Improv is bad

martin

----
I like it, but I do find it fucking hilarious as well: watching these old alcoholic socialists banging stuff together. Brilliant. I think you would like Machine Gun, by the Peter Brotzmann tentet actually.

I'm hoping it involves randomly firing off volleys from an AK-47 on a shooting range...but will have a squizz for it on Mediafire anyway...
 

woops

is not like other people
when improvisation = composition you have rendered meaningless the distinction
 

john eden

male pale and stale
when improvisation = composition you have rendered meaningless the distinction

I'm not saying that they are the same, just that improvisation is one of the tools which is used in composition.

This comes back to the value, or lack of, of having recordings of improv gigs.

How is a recording of an improv gig different from a recording of any other gig?
 

zhao

there are no accidents
how come?

because a lot of music is written according to a set structure, and played according to the score.

sure you can say a bit of improvisation went into the compositional process of trying things that might work, or that each interpretation sounds slightly different, but improvisation play very minor, non-roles in the creation and consumption of the music.

of course fundamentally speaking improvisation is everywhere. but the whole reason why we (arguably i guess) need a genre specifically deals with improvisation is that improvisation and playfulness and a sense of adventure, if it can be described as that, has been marginalized by the implementations of various codes and structures.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
'I do not write experimental music...my experimenting is done before I make my music. Afterwards it is the listener who must experiment.' Edgar Varese
 

zhao

there are no accidents
This comes back to the value, or lack of, of having recordings of improv gigs.

How is a recording of an improv gig different from a recording of any other gig?

yeah "recorded music is canned music", and we should listen to improv recordings once and throw them away...
 
Last edited:

woops

is not like other people
it's a good line.
improvisation is a part of the interpretation of a composition, that's why I see scores marked ad lib.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
because a lot of music is written according to a set structure, and played according to the score.

sure you can say a bit of improvisation went into the compositional process of trying things that might work, or that each interpretation sounds slightly different, but improvisation play very minor, non-roles in the creation and consumption of the music.

of course fundamentally speaking improvisation is everywhere. but the whole reason why we (arguably i guess) need a genre specifically deals with improvisation is that improvisation and playfulness and a sense of adventure, if it can be described as that, has been marginalized by the implementations of various codes and structures.

That's interesting. It's not something I know much about so I'm not intentionally up for an argument or anything.

is it really true that lots of music is played according to the score? I'd be surprised if that was the case for anyone on here who made music?

And ditto with composition - I imagine for a lot of people here they are dealing with very rigid rhythmic structures in terms of bpms, but surely all the stuff which makes tracks interesting is a product of arsing about, improvising, mistakes, experimenting?
 

john eden

male pale and stale
I should also say that Improv as a genre is not something I know to much about but have seen a reasonable amount of it live. And sometimes it's rubbish and sometimes it's great - usually on the same night.

For example I was at this thing on Sunday where Walter Cardew (son of...) was playing. He wasn't reading sheet music or anything, so I guess it was improvised. It was ok, glad I saw it.

Incidentally how do "conceptual" scores fit into this? Like that Stockhausen piece "Hunger" where they have to starve themselves for a week and then play one note (i.e no chords)?
 

zhao

there are no accidents
that stockhausen piece at audio poverty was gorgeous wasn't it?

to an extent its a matter of degrees, focus, and intent.

lots of improv players, or all, have a routine and specific pallete of sounds that they use, signatures if you will, so how improvised is each performance is up to debate...

a friend mentioned once that the background and experiences of each free player, and their interaction with another player, makes it that at any given point in time, they HAVE TO produce the sound that they did, and no other sound is possible... really interesting determinist angle.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
that stockhausen piece at audio poverty was gorgeous wasn't it?

Yes, especially the cellist :eek:

I think probably what I'm getting at is that it is a question of degree and intent as you say.

I'm interested in stuff like - when Jah Shaka plays a record and then messes with the bassline via his pre-amp and adds lots of sirens on top of it, is he improvising?
 

zhao

there are no accidents
when Jah Shaka plays a record and then messes with the bassline via his pre-amp and adds lots of sirens on top of it, is he improvising?

to a very small degree i would say. the dynamic he is after is an established one, that of "mashing up the dance", the timing, and sounds he uses, are all according to convention.
 

john eden

male pale and stale
to a very small degree i would say. the dynamic he is after is an established one, that of "mashing up the dance", the timing, and sounds he uses, are all according to convention.

Yeah I can see that and fair enough. It does beg the question about conventions of skronking saxophones tho?
 

zhao

there are no accidents
It does beg the question about conventions of skronking saxophones tho?

yeah like i said earlier, almost all "free" players have a bag of tricks that they use. palettes, dynamics, etc. it's routine to an extent... i can spot a few artists in any recording -- we humans are all creatures of habit after all. but the nature of what they do, responding to ideally un-premeditated situations, according to their abilities and sensibilities, and according to if they are feeling a bit ill or happy that day, makes it much more improvised than a reggae selector or rock drummer.
 

Leo

Well-known member
i too know far less than others about improv, but do know that i enjoy it more when there's at least something going on (paul baran's recent "panotic" on fang bomb is a good example). i remember picking up the rowe/tilbury "duos for doris" 2cd after reading great reviews and "enjoying" it in concept on first listen but really having little desire to hear it again cuz there's just so little going on. the concept of minimal/quiet is fine but not all that inviting.

maybe this is what i mean by it being perhaps better suited to the live performance. if i'd experienced "duos for doris" live, i probably would have been impressed, but it just doesn't pull me in for repeat home listening.
 
On record I tend to listen to improvised music as if it was composed. After all it is 'spontaneous composition' and there are so many shades of grey. In many cases I don't even know to which degree the music is improvised, edited or composed. Improv purists would probably shake their heads.
In a performance situation it's a bit different. Part of the appeal is to see how the performers try to deal with each other. The improviser has to be very much in 'the now' and make new decisions for every moment what to do (or not), and following that as a listener can be very exciting. But of course, improv can be dull and clichéd, and it often is. But that's true for every type of music.
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
I should also say that Improv as a genre is not something I know to much about but have seen a reasonable amount of it live. And sometimes it's rubbish and sometimes it's great - usually on the same night.

exactly so :)

people are trying to make stuff up right there on the spot.
obviously some (a lot) of it is going to be garbage
 

subvert47

I don't fight, I run away
On record I tend to listen to improvised music as if it was composed. After all it is 'spontaneous composition' and there are so many shades of grey. In many cases I don't even know to which degree the music is improvised, edited or composed. Improv purists would probably shake their heads.

No, that makes complete sense. When improv is recorded it thereby becomes composed after you've listened to it more than once; i.e. you hear patterns in the music, impose patterns on it, etc.

So I guess the true improv fan should only listen to the recording once and then throw it away ;)

edit: ah I see zhao already said that :)
 
Last edited:

Slothrop

Tight but Polite
In a performance situation it's a bit different. Part of the appeal is to see how the performers try to deal with each other.
A lot of them approach this partly as a political thing, don't they? Kind of like an improvised performance is a microcosm of how people can relate in an anarchist society or something? Don't really know much about this, but that's the impression I've picked up from the odd interview in the Wire, at least. I'd be interested if anyone knows more about this angle...
 
Top