[FRIAM] The Spectra and Dimensionality of Collaboration

[Steven A Smith]

Glen



> Well, as usual, we have to avoid any artificial discretization.  Collaboration comes in a spectrum of types just like everything else.  The lag time for feedback from one's recorded music (or video, books, etc.) is much longer than that of a "live" show.  But that doesn't mean there is no feedback to the artist or publisher.  And, as you point out, the system might be a 3 compartment system (artist, DJ, listener), which not only affects the lag time, but also the quality and type of signal (including more types: artist-listener, artist-DJ, DJ-listener, artist-listener-DJ, artist-DJ-listener, etc.).
I naturally accept your (nominally) continuous spectrum as well as the
extra-degrees of freedom to which you can probably add composer,
lyricist, producer, and an arbitrary other number of players.
> I don't construct hardly any music, even though I trained a bit on piano and trumpet.  But I have participated in a few jam sessions (using a drum forcibly shoved at me).  Low latency collaboration between musicians is obviously required.  And I can even see the need for such tight couplings between, say, conductor and orchestra, or musician and performing dancers or whatnot.  But I still don't really understand the apparent *need* of stage bands to see their audience *react* in immediate, active, and obvious ways right then and there.
I think *my* anecdotal point was that *I* didn't used to understand the
degree to which some artists feel like their work is collaborative... we
can characterize it as "feedback from the audience" and posit all kinds
of coupling coefficients across space and time, but to them it appears
to be *collaborative* more than "needing a responsive audience".      

On one end, an ad-hoc washboard, spoon, and jug band would appear to be
the MOST collaborative... with the members of the audience (maybe nobody
is an audience if everyone in the kitchen or on the porch is tapping
their foot, entrained to the tempo the more obvious members of the group
are trying to find/establish/maintain) participating and even rotating
through various instruments and/or all vocalizing/clapping/stomping
along.  Yee Haw!

I can't say for you (Glen, or anyone else reading this) but I find my
own physical response to music to be across a wide range from
shoe-gazing (as you put it) to a fairly strong physical response.   It
sounds like maybe Gil is just finding/hitting his stride with
physical/emotional entrainment to music and maybe more importantly
others dancing to the same rhythms in a group?   I've had my moments
(mostly in my relative youth) when I did "get down and boogie" a little
and even now find myself able to *sway* to some music, but I *also*
understand just meditating to the music... listening intently without
any obvious physical response.

I think I hear the key to your reflection here being the *expectation*
of the band (or it's members) on you (the audience) or maybe more
strongly but tangentially, the *need* for it.    Both of my daughters
hooked up in their early adult years with musicians who performed in
public (not quite pro, but not entirely amateur)...  they were both
*very* introverted (one exclusively was a drummer, the other
multi-talented but spent most of his time on stage with a keyboard) and
neither would have openly admitted the need for a live audience for
feedback, yet both seemed to feel that they (usually) played better to
an audience.   Some of that might be attributed to the rest of the band
*needing* (wanting/appreciating?) the feedback of a
moshing/banging/stomping/clapping/dancing/swaying/singalonging audience
and being jazzed themselves, helping these two young men have a better
experience *with* the band.   Or maybe they *did* need/want that kind of
coupling, it just didn't fit their self-image to admit they
wanted/needed it?

Neither performs in public (much if at all) anymore but one is a
semi-pro producer (meaning he has set up an elaborate ad-hoc recording
studio and helps others produce music).   He has a full mixing setup in
the basement along with amps and speakers and soundproofing and a number
of his own instruments across a spectrum and room for small groups to
jam... but when they *record*, he has mic and headphone cords running to
every room in the house upstairs, and he sets each band-member up in
*relative* isolation so that they only hear one another through their
headphones as they lay down tracks.    Yes, the *do* remix tracks played
out of time, etc. also but from what he tells me, the best work is done
playing in real-time but only over the wire... nobody hearing anyone
else sound waves, just the actual recording as it is layed down/mixed a
fraction of a millisecond behind I suppose... they don't look across the
room at one another for meaningful glances, or watch the other
"grooving" on his/her own instrument.   If we had video of them in their
rooms, I suspect they are *all* grooving they whole time, just as if
they were in front of an audience...  the full-body kinesology is likely
a key part of the music-making even IF it looks (to me) like at least
part affectation.

He says he misses playing live gigs but doesn't miss the drama of being
in bands which plays live gigs.  I'll have to ask him if he misses the
live audience or just the effect of the live audience on his bandmates. 

- Steve




>
> There is a clear bifurcation of stage bands, though.  The math rock bands, being largely engrossed in their production, don't seem to care that much about getting/seeing reactions during their performance.  The same seems true of most stoner, psy, and noise acts.  So, I have to infer a strong correlation between the musicians' internal physiology and their product type.  Different types of intentional evocation require/dictate different types of interaction.
>
> And to be clear, it's not that I do or don't feel obligated to react visibly.  It's that I don't parse music by moving my body.  In fact, physical movement interferes with my ability to listen carefully.  So, yeah, if you want me to move, play rote ostinatos that I've heard over and over again in one form or the other.  But if you want me to *hear*, then play something interesting and don't demand any movement from me. 8^)
>
>
> On 07/11/2018 07:47 PM, Steven A Smith wrote:
>> I am coming to appreciate more what artists (including poets and
>> musicians) mean when they talk about their work being collaborative with
>> their audience (fans, readers, etc.)  
>>
>> I share your (Glen) sentiment (as something of a shoe-gazer myself) that
>> I am not in any (specific) way obligated to respond to their work, yet I
>> do believe that my response (even if it is roughly *intense shoe
>> gazing*) is an important part of what they are doing.
>>
>> I remember listening to an NPR story (This American Life?) years ago on
>> roughly the anniversary of the first public/commercial audio recording
>> of a musical performance and the reception such a thing had at that
>> time.  Musicians were supposedly entirely non-plussed by this
>> development... the anecdotal explanation being that they simply didn't
>> recognize the *sound* being emitted as being representative of the
>> art/performance...   it obviously had a central role in some sense, but
>> by the time *we* came of age (depending on who "we" is here, anywhere
>> from the early 50s to the 2000s (I know only of one specific member of
>> this list under 30?) commercial LP and audio tape (reel to reel, 8
>> track, cassette, ???) recordings were a strong standard in the way we
>> experienced music.   As a DJ in the early 70s, I was aware that for any
>> given popular song, there may be several or *many* recorded versions
>> (usually from different live concerts) with subtle variations and that
>> *I*, with my "curatorial" role with music felt it very important to know
>> that *somebody was listening*.   When I allowed requests and
>> dedications, it was invariably maddening that the callins were almost
>> exclusively "teeny boppers" asking for the most ridiculously saccharine
>> music over and over (during Michael Jackson's "Ben" fame, they would
>> call *while* it was playing to ask me to play it... I set a hard and
>> fast rule that no song, no matter how popular would ever get played more
>> than once during my 3-4 hour show.
>>
>> Of course, Gil's questions/requests here were not intended as
>> (performance?) art, so this doesn't apply directly.   I know that when
>> *I* as a question into the air and get absolutely NO response, it is
>> easy to take the deafening silence personally.