Don Rosco said:
FWIW, I quite like your stuff. It's a little smoothed-out for me, but it's very good for what it is.
edit: that compliment reads way worse than I meant it to. I really do like your music!
I'd agree completely that it's smoothed-out. If I were making music today, and had the means, it would be a) much more rhythm-oriented and b) much rougher/sharper in its textures. But even when I was recording this stuff, the thing that frustrated me (untill I let go of it) was that the results were always so
pretty and ethereal, despite the ad-hoc, improvisational, do-it-all-in-24-hours methodology. It didn't sound like any of the music I most admired--I don't really listen to pretty, acoustic-electric improvisation ; )
Don Rosco said:
I'm not sure I understand that attitude - you make music, ergo you're a musician. It's not some club you have to be invited to. You're there!
Well, it's not really a matter of modesty, of being "not yet there". It may even be a perverse sort of pride, one which isn't really consistent with my feelings about craftsmanship in other artforms. But what I mean is that music-making isn't what I do--it's not a deep and abiding passion. Partly I refer to the fact that I have no technical skill or knowledge whatsoever, and despite the post-punk ethos of "it's easy, it's cheap, go and do it," I still have a certain reverence for those who invest the time and dedication it takes to have proactive control of craft--those who can "have an idea" and make it so, rather than responding passively to intuition alone, as I do. I never had anything but the vaguest "idea" of what I wanted to create--I just picked up whatever cheap instruments I could find and fucked around.
I tend to reserve the term "musician" for people like my many friends who simply
must make music. It's something I used to do literally for a day or two, once every six months or so--recording a whole "album" in a few hours. Not that it doesn't "count," but I see it as having a different role than the stuff made by all the musicians I most admire and love. It's still valid--it's just not something that I'd feel right about, say, charging money for, when there are so many vocational musicians who need the support (nor do I have any need to "compete" in that sort of "market"). I guess what I mean is it's a hobby, not a calling.
[long ramble, skip, the point's not well made]
I can't remember who wrote it, but I remember reading or hearing a theory that prior to recorded/scored sound and professional, travelling Musicians, every village or clan or whatever needed musicians; and that after the advent of "portable music," as it were, the emphasis shifted to "the best," the virtuosos, the master-craftsmen (and later, I suppose, the best-hyped, too). Suddenly the "local talent" was in many ways seen as uneeded--everyone ostensibly had to compete with those at the "top".
Now, obviously things aren't that cut and dry. And frankly I'm immensely glad I live in an age where I can hear sounds of soul-shaking, paradigm-expanding talent and expression--I tend to like this aspect of a connected globe. I don't mean to romanticise the "local talent". Nevertheless, I think the pop/punk/hip-hop/internet continuum (in the "West") has to some degree restored the role of the "local" talent, although now it's more a matter of scale than place. In a way, I think the "smaller" music (I call my page 'Tiny Music' for a reason) is almost a relief from the Exceptional Works of Art that could easily fill up every moment of artistic appreciation. It's not "less than," it's just. . . different. It doesn't require an audience larger than the person making it--which may make it indulgent, but that's not a problem since it doesn't pretend to be something to set the world on fire. If no one had ever heard the stuff I did beside me, it would still have been worthwhile for me--it's like sketching, or doodling, or learning to play the piano at the age of 35. It's just for fun. All that isn't to say that the same basic approach and philosophy can't inform Music with a capital M (I see Eno as a prime example)--but the distinction is it's not essential. Despite all of the punky ideals about how anyone can do it--I think if I were honest with myself, I'd say that *most* of the music that has deeply moved me was made by musicians with a fire in their belly, with an insatiable desire to create--with a certain sort of ambition and skill. I don't mean Yngwie Malmsteen--it's not a matter of ego or technical roboticism or even professionalism--it's just
passion, I guess.
[/ramble]
