Re: [microsound] on working methods for live performance

[Ian Andrews <i.andrews@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wrightmichaelmw@xxxxxxxxxxxx:

> do think it's important for the audience to know the performers
> working process?  Do you think the guy and his powerbook is boring or the way
> to go?

This has always been a sensitive subject but speaking entirely from myself,
I get much more out of a performance if there are even vague clues in
regards to the performers working process. This is not to say that I cannot
enjoy a good laptop performance. I don't really need to know the details of
the software or hardware setup but it does help to know, in the most general
terms, what the performance is.  In other words, what is it that is
performative about the performance?  Is the performer generating sounds,
mixing and arranging, processing, playing a pre-recorded piece, or a
combination of these? Often in a laptop performance these basic processes
are obscured.  Also I must say 3 or 4 laptop performances in a row can
become a little tedious for me. (OK I said it... bring on the poisonous
barbs)

 > Who puts on a good show using electronics?

My personal preference is for performances which engage with structured
process, aleatory process, acceptance of errors, etc. rather than
improvisation, expression or virtuosity. Here in Sydney we don¹t get to see
a lot of what's going on in the world in terms of live performance so I
apologise that my examples are Sydney based.

1. Scott Horscroft's strumming piece which has 5 or more electric guitarists
(without amps) whose strumming of a single chord gets processed during the
performance by Horscroft. The performance IS the processing. The Guitarists
don't perform. They simply strum like a machine.  I like this inversion of
what is usually a highly performative instrument relegated to the machinic
space of non-performance.

2. The Loop Orchestra bring 5 or 6 open reel tape recorders on which they
play a number of pre-recorded tapeloops. The loops are played in a
particular order and mixed together during the performance. The whole
construction on stage is such a beautiful representation of the composition
process in action.

> In my opinion, leafcutter john, kaffe matthews and fennesz are doing the most
> interesting stuff at the moment.  Kaffe Matthews makes her working methods
> very clear.  Do you think it would be the same if we weren't aware and took
> the
> sound at face value?

I think it definitely adds to the performance.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org