noise event (1 Viewer)

[John]

There are others who would argue that Connors saved that gig from total mediocrity; not I as it happens, but you wouldn't want to be so quick to go knocking something you clearly didn't understand. And expecting Connors to change his style entirely just to suit a crowd predominantly familiar with Jim O Rourke's later work (slated by his long time following as a total sell out) is just plain arrogant. Audience empathy is for rock bands, and whether he improvised well or not is a matter of opinion - more so than any other form of musical expression. A lot of people I talked to thought O Rourke was cack.

 

[Pantone247]

I thought it was one of the best gigs I've been to.

I've met very few, if any, people who felt likewise.

 

[mugwump]

...but you wouldn't want to be so quick to go knocking something you clearly didn't understand. And expecting Connors to change his style entirely just to suit a crowd ...is just plain arrogant.

What did I not understand then...please explain to me the greatness of Connors. Like I said before, if you're going to improvise you have to be able to do it well. If my memory serves me correctly he played the same couple of chords, with the same chorus effect or whatever the hell it was for the whole night. That to me is not good or interesting music. It's boring, uncreative and extremely stale. For me good improv. music (or whatever you want to call it - you know what I mean) live has been Spiritualized, Spy vs. Spy, Damien Frost...there have been times when they have played live when it's goodbye to structure and hello to winging it...and it has sounded amazing. I agree that he shouldn't change his style, but I never said that he should. I simply said that being aware of wether or not the crowd you are playing to is into what you're playing is a good thing. Wether you decide to do anything about it (when making shit up) is your perrogative... Have you heard any of his albums ? What's it like ? As you seem to 'Understand' Connors better than I, what's he about ?

 

[John]

I didn't claim to 'understand' Loren Mazzacane Connors better than you. If you'll read back through my post, I said you clearly did not, and your citing Spiritualised and Damien Frost as top class improvisors merely compounds this; theyre both great, but as far as improvisation goes, they are both on the decidedly tame end of the spectrum, if at all.Personally, I didn't like what Loren Mazzacane Connors was up to on the night, but comparing him with Spritualized doesn't make very much sense. I'd leave explaining what he's about to Johnny S. Legend Man, cause I'm off home and am not about to get into a huge debate on the merits of improv...sorry...

 

[chickenham]

my two sense .... ker-ching!!!!
lmc connors stuff was edgy and a bit unfocussed; that and the low-low whelan's volume policy didn't help the visceral effect of his music, nor did the spectacle of the man himself (looking nervous and untogether (when in doubt - close your eyes)) but he delivered the only music that night with any kind of edge.
his approach is that of a folk artist cutting the moorings, maybe like your local ry cooder going on a major 'walkabout' at the community centre to the bewilderment of all.
going along with somebody on a journey like that is something of a leap of faith, particularly if the improvising isn't centred around virtuosity and tricks. it's a state of mind for both the player and the listener.
that tour was actually a mazzacane connors tour and o' rourke (a huge fan) was added to the bill to help make it viable. if you think that o' rourke succeeded where connors failed then i'd suggest that the beast of improv is a very different one from yr folkies 'n' yr rawkitups and that o'rourke just succeeded in a different way (to be kind to him).

 

[Johnny S. Legend Man]

In relation to Loren appearing nervous and untogether, bear in mind that this is a man suffering from Parkinson’s Disease. I also agree with Chickenham in relation to the volume. Whatever it was about the attitude of the crowd that night, Loren's set was treated as some kind of "support act" irrelevance. With that level of chatter going on, even the most committed listener could be forgiven for packing it in and hitting the bar. Put in a more favourable context, his music can be a complete headlifter. In Dublin this would either have to be a theatre, or at least give him the headliner he deserves. Also difficult, since his medication wears off by 10pm (no joke), a curfew he was seriously pushing in Whelans. Anyway, it seems nobody knew who the hell he was, and didn't give him the time of day. Shame really, since he has created a body of work that any self-respecting artist would be more than proud of.
In my view, O'Rourke's set on the night was a dose of purposeless teenage-bedroom guitar nonsense, where any sense of exploration was replaced with careless self-indulgence. Anyway, never mind.
Loren’s work is like a continuously expanding road-movie; a huge, personal journey like endlessly zooming in on Ry Cooder’s ‘Paris, Texas’ and creating a whole new and much vaster world. He doesn't just flirt with the idea, he gets right in there, he delves. Consequently, he works at a different speed. Slow. Very, very slow. But he has created a language he can very much call his own. This is not quick fix stuff. It is a leap of faith, albeit a very rewarding one. There are no audience hooks. Just a never-ending journey inwards made to look like the Nevada desert.
Therein lies the perceived sameness, for some people, I would reckon. But everything was wrong for it in Whelans. I was more than a little taken aback, and embarrassed, by the level of disrespect for him that night. But there you go. These things happen. In a way it made it even lonelier and more disconnected in real terms than I've ever heard it. You'll just have to take my word for it when I say the man is brilliant. Brilliant, committed, sincere... ...very slow.

 

[egg_]

"The music you like is shit."

"No it's not. It's just that you don't understand it. But the music YOU like is shit."

"No it's not. You just don't GET it. But the music YOU like IS shit."

"No it's not ..." etc. etc.

 

[egg_]

Here's what I think about 'audience empathy'.

Performance is about communication. If what is happening on stage doesn't connect with the audience in any way, then the performance has been a failure. Responsibilty for success rests with both the communicator and the communicated-to.

 

[billygannon]

Holy shit!! That gig was ages ago....

Anyway, nothing beats an oul' sing-song or a hoedown with raunchy lyrics....that'll get a crowd going

 

[Pantone247]

egg_ (10 May, 2001 09:50 a.m.):
Here's what I think about 'audience empathy'.

Performance is about communication. If what is happening on stage doesn't connect with the audience in any way, then the performance has been a failure. Responsibilty for success rests with both the communicator and the communicated-to.

Don't listen to Egg, the music he likes is 'shit'

 

[snap-apple]

egg has a point though - I mean what's the use in paying your few squids if the "performer" is only going to indulge himself. i think sometimes it becomes a bit like you're missing out on the in-joke. That said however Connors seemingly delivered what was expected of him to those that knew what to expect. in my opinion if you pay to see someone play that you don't know nowt about you can't grumble if it's not your thing...

 

[Keeror]

The only way Loren could have empathised with 90% of that crowd would have been to get offstage, order a pint and natter to his mates, loudly.

It cuts both ways - the audience should give the performer some respect too, donchathink?

Basically, his amp was too damn small (why Import?). He tends to play quietly anyway but a big amp would have given him much more control and power. And Whelan's crowds are generally not into listening. They have to be blasted into submission. I guess that's what happens if you put on gigs in pubs.

Anyway, this is old news. This thread is supposed to be about Winter. And circle pits.

Tip for peole thinking of attending Winter - 99% of it will be way louder than Loren Mazzacane.

If you think anybody who abandons conventional (and arbitrary) verse-chorus-middle eight-repeat to fade song structures is failing to empathise with the crowd, don't go.

If you think any musician who wishes to try something new in a live context, without worrying how popular that will be, is self-indulgent, don't go.

If you want to hear people making odd and exciting and loud sounds, stepping back from themsleves and their usual genre restrictions, then go.

Despite the lectures it's not an academic thing, it's only incidentally experimental - the point is to make people's ears ring and to push the envelope at the extreme end.

 

[John]

Preach it brother!

ps. I'm not going..



pps.only joking...

 

[chickenham]

a short list:
igor stravinsky: the rite of spring (riot)
steve reich: four organs (hostile audiences)
r.fripp / b.eno: (as above)
gyorgi ligeti: poeme symphonique (panned - archive recording made inaccessible by the dutch government (who commissioned it))
suicide: support tour with elvis costello (life threatening violence)

don't tell me that audiences are any kind of arbiters of quality or taste!

thankew

 

[Pantone247]

one of the geezers from suicide got his nose broken on stage by a burly punker when they were supporting the clash.

the 'audience' have redeemed themsleves once again. Hurrah!!