[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] the clueless leading the blind



On 6/10/02 at 8:24 AM, anechoic <kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> "wacky" sound sources... this opens a discussion that I have been
> trying to let germinate for the past couple of years concerning
> this style (Matmos/Herbert) of music and it's inherent "novelty
> quotient" which always makes for "interesting copy" for newbie
> journalists who think they have "discovered something"

Your post took me to Amazon's page for the Matmos album and I had to
laugh at the online reviews. Not sure whether these folks are the
audience for Russell Smith's writings, or whether "The Globe and Mail"
recruits from Amazon's pages. Anyway, they're attached below...

The obvious question to ask first is whether these works have any
intrinsic musical interest. That is, if you knew nothing of the sound
sources and their signifigance for the composer, is it work you find
affecting? If we can't get that far, we're really in trouble.

To me, these works share in the tradition of "programmatic music" whose
practitioners include Ottorino Respighi and Charles Dodge. Where in
years past we might have felt we could close our eyes and just "see the
Pines of Rome," or "really know" what the Earth's magnetic field sounded
like, today we can vicariously slim with surgical fat reduction and
experience the siren cries of Global Capitalism. With a bit of irony...

This programmatic tradition seems to me a kind of intellectual training
wheels, providing a big organizing idea for those fearful of a hard fall
on the aesthetic pavement, but also reducing the many possible
interpretations of these works into one. (Of course, to get back to
"intrinsic musical interest," if the concept is working harder than the
sounds, maybe we should just imagine the music and forget about the
CDs!)

Ultimately, it's the ends to which this strategy is being put, and I
think it's different in Matmos' and Herbert's cases. I'd put Matmos in
the "novelty" category, simply because that's where the music business
wants to put them. It's up to them to fight to retain their musical
integrity.

Back at the turn of the 20th century, our relationship as individuals to
society spawned the notion of the "autonomous artist," which permitted
us to confront our unmediated selves in the act of creation. Creating
without regard for audience was a valid act. This notion, which was
always part of a bourgeois social revolution, has been tightly
integrated into our modern economy and is the cornerstone of commercial
culture from "Revolutionary New Tide" to the new iMac to Berliniamsburg.

This commodification of our psyche is what DeBord put forth in _Society
of the Spectacle_, and as business becomes more accomplished at it, and
the possibilities of our current social organization become exhausted,
the moment between our discovery of a crack in the void and it's being
offered for sale becomes microsonic.

So Matmos and Russell Smith are just doing their jobs.

I'd give Matthew Herbert some credit for trying to create social space
through music, but his effort points up how hard it is to do it credibly
when you're all alone.

David Katz's biography of Lee Perry did a great job of detailing the
social discourse created in Kingston's dancehalls during the mid/late
sixties. The Rude Boy problem, the persecution of Rastafarians and the
1966 emergency were some of the many topical issues that found their way
onto record and into the toasts of sound system MCs.

In Kingston's case, the community of belief, shared speech and public
site created the music as much as artists like Lee Perry, Bob Marley and
U-Roy.

> also, lumping these artists into the glitch movement (whatever
> that is) is perplexing...what makes their music "glitch"?

I'd say that if the "glitch movement" didn't want poorly informed
journalists lumping people in that don't belong there, then the glitch
movement needs to more tightly define itself. And call the journalist
and explain why.

Some groups have been tightly defined: Cubists, the Bloomsbury Group,
12-toners. Others more loosely. (Can you name all the Surrealists?) I
suspect that those associated with glitch are probably relaxed about
strict definitions and will probably always find mis-associators at
their edges.

As that Canadian Surrealist Mimi Parent once said: "Knock hard. Life is
Deaf."


----------------------------------------  

Ship to:
Add gift-wrap/note
3 new: from $10.99
1 used: from $14.54
Have one to sell? - or - Don't have one?
Only 5 left in stock--order soon (more on the way).
To ensure delivery by June 16, choose Father's Day Guaranteed Shipping?
only $3.99 more than Standard Shipping.
Great Buy Buy A Chance to Cut Is a Chance to
Cure with The West today! Buy Together Today: $28.98

2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:

The funky sounds of surgery coming from San Fran..., June 2, 2001
Reviewer: Matthew Jaworski (see more about me) from East Pointe,
MI United States Ahhh... The sweet sounds of surgery. Liposuction
has never sounded so funky (nor has Lasik eye-surgery or
rhinoplasty). Thru excellent source material, great sample
techniques, creatvie ears, and a great melodic sense, Matmos have
managed to construct their best release thus far. I never
realized Bard Parker Scalpels, Draeger Anesthesia Ventilators,
and the human skull could be used to such musical and melodical
ends. A truly creative album here, that turns the sounds of
surgery into sublime house music. This by far surpasses their
previous efforts, as it is a much more cohesive work, utilizing
their somewhat gimmicky methods of sound gathering to a fully
realized end. This CD, along with recent Schematic releases (Lily
of the Valley, Ischemic Folks, House of Distraction, and Otto von
Schirach), are currently among the best, most daring electronic
releases out right now. If you like Plunderphonics, Paul Lansky,
Steinski, or anyone else who utilizes interesting sample
techniques, you will love this.

Was this review helpful to you?  

Interesting Concept Album, November 3, 2001 Reviewer: weasel7373
(see more about me) from Chicago, IL United States I tend to
refrain from using the phrase "concept album" because it is the
same thing that critics labelled Ok Computer by Radiohead, which
is certainly NOT a concept album, but this is. The California
musicians use unique sounds sampeled from such operations as
liposuction, lasik eye surgery, acupuncture and plastic surgery.
The sounds come out with a unique blend of experimental and
electronic bleeps.

I felt like this album was a must-have after seeing them perform
live with Bjork, which was certainly a unique experience.
Basically, they used a lot of the same tools live as they did in
the album. For example the song "Ur Tchun Tan Tse Qi" uses a
machine that measures acupuncture points, which they used live
too. So, not only did they perform a little show, but the music
was fantastic.

This album really is for those who have a high tolerance for odd
music. If you do not, it will be a waste of money. DO NOT BUY
THIS ALBUM if you simply saw them with Bjork, because you may not
like it because it is very odd. However, it is some of the most
interesting and well developed electronic music out there to date
because its so experimental and unlike some Warp and even
Astralwerk musicians, Matmos develop a strong sense of beginning
middle and end.

Overall, a very interesting album and if you can stomach it
(which sometimes it is hard) it is worth the ... or so.

Was this review helpful to you?   Write an online review and
share your thoughts with other customers. 3 of 3 people found the
following review helpful:

....Genuine blend between house music and musique concrète...,
February 14, 2002 Reviewer: Rafael Cova Q. (see more about me)
from Caracas, Venezuela "A Chance To Cut is A Chance To Cure",
the most recent album by San Francisco duo Matmos, released in
the early months of 2001, has all attires and attitude of what
could be perceived as the future of electronic music. Taking
their influences from a bunch of very accurate and singular
artists (Coil, Nurse With Wound, Brian Eno, Herbert, Autechre),
the duo of Drew Daniel and martin Schmidt has come up with a
record (their fourth) almost entirely composed from samples of
surgical operations, eye surgery, autopsies, etc. However, when
listening to the record, the raw material used for its conception
is never obvious. It is only when reading the sleeve notes that
the true nature of the sounds becomes clear. In weir way, "A
Chance To Cut is A Chance To Cure", is a poetic record that
challenges every cliché in the electronic music book. Matmos'
work should be perceived as a true epiphany to those who strike
to archive the success of both form and function, within the
electronic music field. Their work is a genuine blend between
house music and musique concrète, mixing the avant-garde's
achievements and experiments with house music's more appealing
and festive urgency. "A Chance To Cut is A Chance To Cure" levels
John cage, Pierre Schaeffer, Pierre Henry's "Messe pour le temps
présent" and Herbert up to the same creative stage. By doing so,
it has set new standards for the next few years' up and coming
electronic producers.