Squeeler Music Acid Mothers Temple & The Melting Paraiso U.F.O. : In C (JAP,2002)***°°
Still my favourite piece of the Acid Mother's temple group. This is droning trance-consuming psychedelica with the basic terrific idea of the melody pattern transposing a bit to create more psychedelic effect. Not only the sounds used for it are original, also the rhythm is perfectly fitting with the piece and execution. Some krautrock like echo effects have been used here too. The piece sounds like a combination of the best Ash Ra Temple on the in C pattern.
Nice also to have in E included on the CD. ->max 4 min 22 -132
AccordGiacinto Scelsi : Quatro Pezzi per Orchestra (ciascuno su una notta sola)
Brilliant piece of this Italian composer (1905-1988) only based upon one note. Mostly with pich and overtone variations.recorded in 1989 by Radio and Television orchestra under direction of Jürg Wyttenbach.
Tr.1, 3 min, 2->3 min, 4-230 Short cuts found airplay.
Aureobel Petri Kuljuntausta : Momentum (Fin,1996-2001,iss.2004)***'
Tr.2, "Violin Tone Orchestra" 5 min
Also "Four Notes" and "Canvas" and and many other pieces of this release could easily fit in this show.
Small fragments found its broadcast time.
“what interests me using frozen sounds is their dreamy; slow and timeless character. After stretching and transposing the sounds down you could start to hear hidden characteristics –micro level sound phenomena, interesting overtones, colourful, vibrating and sometimes strange textures” introduces the booklet and this describes already the intention.
What you can hear in the "Violin Tone Orchestra" piece is the transposed multiplied recording of one violin note.
In "Violin Tone Orchestra" it's more an overtone communication between very close sounds of different instruments (choir, electronics, whistle instruments,..). "Four notes" sounds a bit like early Klays Schulze....
interview with Terry Riley was never accomplished. I also didn't find the time to have my questions checked on spelling and understanding
Ideas on in C :
1. Terry once said he created "in C" to make some different angle possible for Western Music. Western classical music suffered sometimes, perhaps even "often" from the easily overuse of melody because of the way music is written on paper. Isn't it strange then that minimalism oself as a genre (I'm not speazking about in C) became another from of a half-mechanical, half-organic form of a different kind of -still interesting- but melodic music ? Perhaps the real genre of minimalism as we know it missed the point of it or otherwise became something else as intended ?
Perhaps we can consider 'in C' as an experiment which might be even outside every genre. I might even have become at least an inspirational source for "creating music", because performing the piece needs some kind of participating in a creative process..
2. How does it come in "Dorian Reed" 'repetition' has a very natural feel, while some early versions of in C still are much more mechanical ?
3. Over the years did your vision on in C changed ? Did you learn something from it ?
4. Is there a reason how it became 53 patterns and how did you come to that ? Were they mostly meant to insure an evolutionary pattern in the composition ?
5. Repetition is used more often in World Music. I heard once an African band playing a pattern over hours. It was so hypnotic people had to start to dance and go into trance. Nobody could help it. When I went and came back after half an hour the composition hadn't changed much in its core and rhythm although it was still pretty complex causing this trance effect, perhaps ot came through some criss cross rhythms and melodic interwoven patterns that were build in such a way that forced the feeling of an ever increasing energy. Did you learn from World Music ideas yourself regarding repetitive patterns which made you reconsider and change ideas on music ?
6. Why did it became in C, and not D, or E ?
7. I will give you something to read. It's about a conclusion on the C-pattern made in a scientific research on DNA and the possibilities to put the patterns into music. This is part of a review of mine on a dna-music related project (published at http://psychevanhetfolk.homestead.com/dna.html) :
"After weeks of experimenting with different sound combinations a tonal centre began to emerge. This pitch seemed to be a kind of C# common to all the bases, with an average 544,2 Hz. Most pianos are tuned around 554 for C#, with a varying difference between the 4 bases of about a 1/4th tone. In any way C# seemed to be almost exactly in the middle of each column, and seemed to act as a balancer for the entire spectrum of frequencies. This discovery was at first cemented musically by the air, but scientifically seemed to be very appropriately fitting. Where C# seemed to act as a balancer, to tonal pitch centre of F# also was found three times in each base collection. Because of the stabilizing C# it seemed appropriate to tune the drum or tabla in C#, the synthesizer is the upper lying level with the original pattern of frequencies, while the accompanying cello, violin and voice work as the free harmonic improvisation around the stabilizing factors, with the drum as basic foundation, and the keyboards as principle, thematic anchor of content. If we contemplate this esoterically we can see this music work as being in a natural balance with man's freedom of expression well balanced between the natural evolving patterns, giving the opportunity through them to go to a higher state of energy (symbolised by the energy absorbing frequencies resulting in the jumps of the electrons into a higher energy state after having absorbed enough energy). When we think about psychological aspects in music we can also reconsider here the thought how we can create such a musical condition pattern that inhabits a jumping pitch energy, often used in real psychedelic music, or tranceor dance energy causing music. Because when a stabilizing pattern of instable harmonic moving elements is used the rhythm pattern and inhabiting energy has to be won in such an effect. Here, in this music, it's especially the stabilizing effect combined with a freedom of expression that has all capacities to express a human nature within a world full of capacities. The frequencies of C# of stabilising and of F# as approaching next levels of energy or something, seemingly to have the same effect on our en energy field, probably because of some magnetic energy patterns measured in our body. "
What do you think of this ?
Maybe this explains why the piece "In C" is so succesful in its core. People feel there's something essential about it. Just consider the balancing effect of the C.
8. Then I have another question about balancing basic tones. Gurdjiev also had difficult theories on music derived from his Sufi-knowledge. With him and in other writings I noticed the idea that "holding to the/a specific tone" seems to have some importance. It is about an essential basic tone where we can measure everything on it (like we write music in C for instance). These notes, os told, are different for some different psychological types of persons. -There exist too much theory to mention just in a few lines-. My actual questions is :
Just imagine there exist something like fundamental tones. Just a philosophical idea. Do we have really have to play leading notes and patterns ? So we need to repeat them all the way through ? Of course repetition can cause a certain angle of a carpetry to build something new upon, or something extra on top of it. But at the same time when this energy succeeds to give this trance-like effect, perhaps even a right spot of silence in some cases still might have this repeated drone somewhere inside it too. Is that idea possible with your piece ?
At some point of silence perhaps the earlier created energy could jump over or could still leap over this time interval of silence within the pattern of continuation ? I hope you know where I'm heading too ? Is it possible to use silence within the building up of the in C piece ?
9. Is your piece a challenge that shows the real intuitive creativity of the performer ?
10. The in C-piece seems to have an almost organic evolution pattern as if from life itself, when it's played fluently. Life itself might not always have such direct one lineness. It struggles, refocuses, and then still succeeds to maintain at least some continuation and evolution. Sometomes such changes might even be useful to evolve to different new angles.
There are 53 patters in the piece. Can you see a philosophically parallel at the point where the musician has to go to the next pattern ? Is it as a matter of speaking at the point where his repetition becomes boring and a real repetition ? Or is the 53 patterns like a structure which should lead enough making ot impossible to become a tedious repetition ? Perhaps these patterns are like next parts of challenges and goals within the contuation of the life pattern which is the repetion otself ? Perhaps the input of other ideas and unexpected changes within the piece are still possible there..bringing an interesting vivid life-force into the musical piece ? In other words where are the limits in building this piece up ?
1a. Last question. A bit of a concusion. How transcendent do you consider in C as a piece ? So you think there exist patterns that can make transcendent music possible ? And is In C such a piece ?
An answer to some of my questions taken from the Boudreau booklet
"The quality of this music depends on the spontanuous interaction that will develop within the hroup of performers. A good performance reveals a world teeming with groups and sub-groups that continually form, separate and re-form in a modal texture that over a period of 45 to 90 minutes will go from C to E and from C to G."
More info on Terry Riley and in C :
intro on minimal music / minimalism :
a few other minimalist artists : Yann Tiersen (F), Wim Mertens (B),Piero Milesi (I), Daniel Lentz, David Borden (US), Steve Reich (US), Terry Riley (US), Philip Glass (US),Michael Nyman, La Monte Young (US)