Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
Good grief, what a week. For all the talk about labels, genres, styles, and philosophies over the last several days, I'd like to suggest a slightly different way of looking at this. In my mind, it boils down to two questions: 1) What, exactly, are you trying to define or promote? 2) How are you trying to promote it, and to whom is the promotion directed? It seems to me that the main reason for all the disagreement right now is because so many people have different objectives, all of which are trying to fall under the banner of "live looping." Everyone I'm commenting on here is someone I'm fortunate enough to consider a good personal and professional acquaintance, so I'm not trying to pick sides here. Rick Walker obviously has a love for looping in and of itself, in an all-inclusive sense, in every conceivable permutation - why else would he stage 20-odd "looping festivals?" He wants to promote that technology, and the community he feels a part of as a result of this technology, to the world. I assume this is what he refers to when he talks about "the cause of looping." Matthias Grob, on the other hand, seems to have a very specific collection of aesthetic and philosophical guidelines for what he defines as "live looping." In his words (as I understand them, anyway) there are certain ways this music begins and develops, and certain mental/philosophical states that are induced in both the player and the listener. So much so, in fact, that he feels my own music represents a different path from the "live looping genre," because it deviates so strongly from his own definitions for that style. Kim Flint sees looping in and of itself as a technology that exists independently of a built-in aesthetic. He thinks it's confusing to promote "looping" in and of itself to the listening public, because at best they won't understand what's being presented to them (due to the vast array of styles involved), and at worst they'll develop biased assumptions about what it can or cannot be (due to only hearing one example, and assuming that IT is what "looping" is.) So, for one person it's an all-encompassing source of fascination and community; for another it's a very specific set of aesthetics and philosophical manifestations; and for yet another it's a set of craftsman's tools, important to the creator but not the listening public. No wonder people can't agree on this. What do I think? I like Rick a lot, and have enjoyed playing with him on several occasions. As I've told him before, if it wasn't for his encouraging looping festivals, I wouldn't have gone back to the EDP two years ago, and none of what I've been doing since then would have happened. He's worked his ass off to book gigs he's been kind enough to invite me to play at, which have made me some money, some new listeners, and some good connections. On those counts, the looping festival concept has been pretty good for me. At the same time, I don't share his all-encompassing love for looping itself, and I don't perceive the same communal connection between all loopers that he does. Some of the stylistic differences at gigs with him have been a bit disconcerting to me: I had a mild panic attack when Steve Lawson's poppy, major-key "Inner Game" followed Rick's set (which included an improv using nothing but clitoral vibrators in drinking glasses) during our Hollywood gig back in January. This doesn't mean that he's wrong at all; it means I have a different point of view than he does. Rick's a self-described hippy and communalist, who lives in a small and intimate community in the Bay Area, who loves looping in all its forms. I'm a loner by nature, who lives in Los Angeles, and most of what I do with the Echoplex is defined by an intense dissatisfaction with the way most people use loopers. He loves highlighting duo and trio improvs and putting together bills with lots and lots of different performers, whereas I want and need to have a reasonable amount of time to do a full set as a solo performer, since this is where nearly all of my time and interest has been, and will be, focused for many years. For these reasons, it wouldn't surprise me if our respective paths are somewhat incompatible, particularly as time goes on. But since we have such different objectives in the first place, I don't see this as any reflection on either one of us, nor on the mutual respect he and I have. I see it simply as the two of us doing what we each need to do in order to acheive our own substantially different goals. I very much enjoyed the brief time I spent with Matthias, and he and I connect very well on a basic guitaristic level. Aesthetically, we're at pretty opposite ends of the spectrum loop-wise, and when he and I played together, the most successful music we made didn't involve any looping at all. I do have a hard time understanding a lot of his philosophical points of view, but I also have a deep respect for where they're coming from and the obvious knowledge and experience with which they've been made. Not to mention the countless hours he's spent building the software and hardware to allow me to play my music in the first place! I can't help but wonder how Matthias' specific aesthetic guidelines for "the live looping style" will mesh with Rick's all-inclusive communalism, but I'm certainly glad to see two such fantastic musicians and thinkers pooling their efforts. If they can reconcile these two different attitudes amongst themselves, perhaps that will help clarify the whole "live looping music" issue for the rest of us. Kim and I seem to be on the same page in terms of how he and I look at looping: it's a means to an end, but not the end itself. It's the starting point, not the destination. Mark Hamburg made the observation that several of "us" do, or can, play the same genre of music, and that a term for this common style would be helpful. My response is that, while several list members have found some common ground in ensemble configurations, this is not necessarily the same territory they would venture into on their own. For instance, the trio tour with Rick and Steve was a lot of fun, largely because it pushed all of us into territory we didn't normally go into. The flip side, though, is that we only had small amounts of time to do "our own things." What I do is a melange of hip-hop, glitch-core, IDM, turntablism, and drum & bass. That's very different from what Bill Walker or Steve Lawson or Jon Wagner do, and each of those guys do substantially different things from one another as well. So if Mark feels that we're all generally operating in the same stylistic territory at these shows, that says to me that our commonalities are being highlighted at the expense of giving our individual voices the room to really shine. That's not so surprising, because if you're putting lots of far-flung musicians together on one bill, it makes sense to "connect the dots," so to speak. I'm grateful for the chance to play at shows like these, but I also recognize that, in my mind, such shows are a means to an end, and not the end itself, because my goal is not to be a professional free-improv looping festival participant. The end, for me, is getting my own voice as a solo player heard. I don't realistically expect that to happen when I'm sharing performance time with half a dozen other players on one bill, and certainly not if I'm stylistically removed from many of them. So, to answer my own question: what am I trying to promote? My own music as a solo player. How am I trying to promote it? By presenting it to audiences who might have an interest in it. That includes people who are into looping, but it also includes fans of dance music, hip-hop, IDM, "guitar" fans, and the complete strangers who have responded very favorably to what I've done, who happened to be at solo gigs at rock clubs and coffee shops which weren't billed as "looping shows" at all. I certainly hope people can find ways to co-exist here, without feeling the need to splinter themselves off into divisive factions. I do have to wonder, though: if a mailing list of a few hundred dedicated looping enthusiasts can't find a way to agree on what "loop music" is, then is it really a good idea to try and promote that concept (whatever it is) to the world at large? Anyway... --Andre LaFosse The Echoplex Analysis Pages: http://www.altruistmusic.com/EDP ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ .