Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Hey there again Mr. Z, Thanks for adding your customarily insightful dialogue herein. > I brought up ACF not as a specific example of a "looping scene" but > as an example of a non-pop "music scene" in Los Angeles. The point I > was trying to make is that you have to create your own scene by > working with whatever tools come to hand... I thought the thread had > moved past that initial discussion into > one about the nature of the West Coast scene and some analysis of > what you have to do to build a community. OK, I got ya. I wasn't sure if you were drawing a connection between the ACF and looping in general, and I can see that's not really the case. > If technique is your main concern then I can see why ACF wouldn't > appeal to you. Our community is musically pluralistic and our > techniques are varied. Some people are doing improvisational > electroacoustic music and some people are writing sacred choral > music. It's all interesting to me My use of the word "technique," in this case, refers simply to the technique of looping audio. It's by no means the only thing I'm interested in (whether in looping or in music in general), but to me that's the core of a "looping scene," such as there is one. Again, I seem to have misinterpreted your comments about the ACF as being specifically geared towards looping. > I'm not sure I think in terms of "total improvisation" - for me it's > more like "real-time composition." Oh, for me too, ideally. But I've found that not all improv is approached from that sort of compositional frame of mind. (To me, one of the things that seperates good improvising from noodling is how much the improviser is able to refer back to and build on a core musical idea). > >The ACF doesn't seem to offer an outlet for these sorts of issues. > > Does that mean our Web site is too fancy? My conclusions here were drawn after going through some of the pages at the group's web site, and more specifically looking at some of the criteria for submitting compositions for the salons. My impression, after having read through the information, was that written music manuscripts (or at least a recording of a fixed musical work) had to be handed in to a committe, which would then determine whether or not this was something that was viable for a formal presentation to the group in general. It also struck me that the orientation of the site seemed to point primarily towards academic work, composition grants, "new music," and the like. So to me, there's not a lot in the content and orientation of the site that would be immediately geared towards people who aren't already operating in the academic or new music realm. I should add that, ultimately, I personally feel a lot of the distinctions between musical "realms" are increasingly meaningless, and that there's an ever-expanding amount of cross-pollination between a lot of wildly divergent areas of musical thought these days. Particularly in electronically-oriented realms, the distinctions between new music, electronica, dance, DJ culture, and contemporary classical seem to be getting more tenuous by the day. From what I know of your own background, and what you've described of the ACF, I'm sure you feel the same way. > "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn." Rhett, Rhett... :) > It's both, depending on who > is doing it and a what moment he/she is doing it. For instance, I > don't particularly think of myself as "a looper" but I use looping > tools and techniques in my music. Well, if that doesn't scare Kevin out of the idea of moving to LA to take part in the alleged Looping Scene, nothing will! :() Your reaction here is, I would say, very similar to my initial reaction to the ACF web site: in both cases, we seem to be thinking, "Yes, I use a lot of the relevant tools, but the requirements of entry seem too specific and strict for me to comfortably fit in." And in both cases, I'd say that's clearly not the case, though it might not be immediately apparent. As far as your not thinking of yourself as a looper... I feel the same way about myself, to a large extent: I don't feel comfortable calling myself a "looping artist" because I don't want to feel like I'm obligated to always be using looping in what I do, you know? I think there's a danger of putting the cart before the horse in that way... ...which brings us back to the main issue I'm wondering about, which is: what kind of "looping scene" is there in California? Yes, we had about two dozen remarkable music performances in San Luis Obispo, and there are a lot (relatively speaking) of musicians who use this technique in their music in this state. But is that something that a guy in Chicago would be able to tap into in an appreciably greater way by living here, rather than just staying subscribed to this list and flying out for a few looping festivals every year? Scenes are usually defined more by style and content than by technique, I would venture to say. Which makes a "looping scene" a prickly proposition, I think. (Is there an "experimental guitar scene" in San Diego just because Allan Holdsworth, Mike Keneally, and Harvey Starr all live there?) Oh well. My hands are sore and I don't know what I'm talking about at this point, but it's always a pleasure to hear your thoughts on these matters, Richard. Best wishes, --Andre LaFosse http://www.altruistmusic.com