Support
Looper's Delight
|
Support |
|
|
On 12 sep 2007, at 06.23, Krispen Hartung wrote: > Consequently, I don't consider myself a looping artist anymore, but > just a creative performance and composition artist. That seems > fitting for what I do, even though looping technology is most > always present in some degree or another in my work. But because of > my passion toward the technology and this list, I still feel > tempted to call myself a looping artist. And I feel a sense of > pride in this when I see other mainstream and well known artists > use looping technology, but only as a gimick or fleeting effect, > vs. somethin that I have really mastered and can use as a > composition tool. We are among the few and proud, but how do we > position ourselves in the music industry? Great that you brought up this discussion again! At some point every creative artist has to pass the line where it matters more what others think you are doing then what you think that you are doing. After all, it's the audience that listen to the noise you're making. You can work hard on educating the masses but people will still keep their own views regarding your music. The more you play out in public the less it matters whatever you consider yourself being - you will get "dubbed" in media as "a looping artist" or "a jazz guitarist" or something else. For musicians that play, or plan to play, professionally this is a constant issue - not unlike "branding" in other businesses. My own view is to use the term "looping artist" on the same descriptive level as for example "a guitar playing artist", "a dancing artist" or "singing artist". But all of these epithets are in my opinion secondary to the major focus that has to do what kind of music you are in fact creating. Genre. I also regard "philosophical" aspects at a higher descriptive level than the tools used (looping device, piano, electronics, drum etc). I this category go things like "extreme attitude", "political agenda" or real-time interaction with the audience or the musical processes related to composing and performing (this is where looping may come in). As you're saying, in this community we tend to place much more emphasis on the use of looping in music making, compared to average listeners. You also mentioned "the industry" and this "the industry" is pretty equivalent to "average listeners" because those are the people the industry is working for (selling them the music as a product). Or rather, "the music industry" stands for the expectations on what the average listener will perceive the music as. I prefer to simply call my own music "Instrumental Music". Eventually stating that it is "cross-over" and naming "Nu-Jazz" and "Minimal" as related genres. I don't even mention, on this highest level of abstraction, that it's improvised, since improvised or composed doesn't matter for how the average listener hears and perceives the music. If asked for a closer description of what I'm doing, I might says "multi lateral improvisation" and if needed follow that up with something like: "In jazz it is common that one musician improvises lead themes over a fixed chord structure background played by other musicians. In my music the same musician, or musicians, typically improvises both the lead themes and the chord structures at the same time. This multi lateral improvisation is made possible by advanced live-looping techniques. It is a very intuitive way of creating music." I keep even more detailed descriptions handy, that goes into the nature of psychedelic music and deals with shared human archetypes regarding gestures and time... (SNIP! Off Topic Intelligence intervention) Greetings from Sweden Per Boysen www.boysen.se (Swedish) www.looproom.com (international)