Some is more music than other, some is freer than other.

To say to a musician that what he or she plays is only almost music, can be perceived as an animosity. When I suggest that some free improvised music is more music than other, it is however not an attempt to alienate anyone, not least since some of the music i play and release myself can be said to fall into the "almost music" category.

To say that some improv is freer than other improv is also problematic, but maybe not so controversial, so let me start there.

This post is yet another of an endless row of attempts to find out what is what. Please bare with me.

I recently went to a concert here in Oslo with a British group (Watts / Weston / Lash / Day). It was great. If I was tell the musicians what I thought; that is sounded great, but that I did not find the set in any way provokingly rebellious they would probably find it ok and give me the only good answer to such a stupid remark. We play what we are and what we hear.

Never the less: This group is a part of a tradition in jazz music where every stretch (or tune) can be said to be a mimicking of when (if) the same group plays a composed tune with improvised parts (choruses). It did not sound as if they only played free versions of the chorus parts of those imagined tunes. It sounded, from the start to the finish of each stretch that they played tunes with heads, choruses and codas. It was great, but a comparative study of this group and Brötzmanns At Fresnes (with Kondo / Pupillo / Nilssen-Love) from 2009 would be interesting. Where At Fresnes is much more aggressive, sometimes almost one-dimensional, Watts / Weston / Lash / Day is sober and lyrical. In my ears and head the latter can be said to be less free than Fresnes is. Not that there is anything wrong with that.

Watts / Weston / Lash / Day is music. Even a person who only listenes to classical music from before 1910 will hear the almost romantic approach the group takes. This is not only because the "mimic" the playing of jazz tunes, but also because their approach is so lyrical and "romantic" sonically and energetically.

At Fresnes is also (and only) music in my ears. Fewer people will however find it pleasant. Those of us who woke up musically to rock music will not have any problems relating to the long set (no tunes here, only a log stretch).

But there are other groups that fall into the improv field that explore the bordes of the term music with their playing. Two words here: noise and sound art.

Noise music has been around for decades. Even if the term itself places it inside the music idiom, it is undoubtably a revolt against music that still provokes many music lovers.  ( In our time it is a blessing to be able to appreciate Marhaug and Mahler equally well.)

Another interesting attempt to enlarge the field of music is the mixture of free improvisation and sound art. One example is the band Lab Field that elevates soundscapes to an "instrument". The effect is striking. It does good to listen to it without thinking much. But since all music is in a certain sense problematic, it can also give food for thought (and endless attempts to find out what is what).

To catch the wind

Improvisation

The art of musical improvisation is hard to define. First: is it an art form? Since it is an important element in so many different forms or styles of contemporary music, it is maybe not right to say it is an art form as such. That does not make it less important. It can be argued that improvisation is the basis of all kinds of music making and performing since the beginning of time. In a sense it lies behind and is the starting point of all music, however composed, calculated or cerebral it may sound. Improvisation has always had a big role to play in traditional music, up until the romantic phase of the music history it was a natural part of any music piece and of course it created the fundament of the development of blues and jazz. In our time it is highly present, as well as highly esteemed, in jazz as well as styles of contemporary art music and some rock styles.

However, since the 1960ties  improvisation has also been elevated to being the aim itself in some styles. These styles can be divided into two: free jazz and contemporary improv.

1) Free jazz grows out of the “artification” of the 1950-ties jazz in the USA. The most important actor in this development, often named the inventor of the style, was the sax player Ornette Coleman. 

2) Contemporary improv can be said to have grown out of the performance scene of the avant garde movement of the same period. To a great extent contemporary improv also generated from the USA but soon spread elsewhere.

3) Gradually we see other improv styles growing out of also other established music forms. Country music is one example. Improvisation that borders to sound art is another.

The development of the three styles detailed above make it possible today to name improvisation as an art form and a music style in its own right.

In the later years, the part of my musicing that can be named improvisation, has evolved from free jazz in the direction of more contemporary/art music influenced forms of expression as noise, soundscape and not least electronics.

What happens during an improvisation?

Measured in decibels: sometimes very much, other times very little. There are different ways to approach an free improv session. The full-force approach is the punk of improv. It is loud and the “arrangement” of an improvised stretch, meaning who plays when, is intentionally very crowded. The result is that everyone plays hard, loud and all through the tune, sometimes during the complete concert. In other music styles this is often considered as a result of bad listening. In this context it is an intentional result of making music that tries to talk directly to the body by not being calculated or brainy in any way. Other times the aim is to explore the quality of improvisation of single notes or simple atmospheres. This is often done by playing very sparsely and by trying to avoid disturbing another musician’s improvising with ideas that conflicts too much. Often this last approach will follow an almost “romantic” pattern where one instrument sets the theme in a quiet way and the others follow by adding or (carefully) contrasting. Sometimes this will end up in an atmosphere of ambient qualities, other times elements of beat can be added.

The few (there are more alternatives) descriptions above indicate how an improvised performance can develop in a number of different ways. Often the improvisation can start from an ambition to create the impression of a composed piece. Some improvising ensembles, be it in free jazz or free art music, tend to mimic a piece from the tradition they came from when they improvise a piece.

In these cases one is reminded about the discussion about non-idiomatic improvisation. While it may be impossible to free the art of improvisation from musical idioms, the attempt to do so is in my view a strong and fruitful artistic aim. It is my tradition(s), compositions, listening experience and playing experience that creates the basis of what I play. Hence, I cannot escape tradition(s) that created me. On the other hand, the art of improvisation must revolt against those traditions to be successful. It is not hard to point to cultural trends preceding the hippies of the 1960-ties, but the hippie movement would not be as important as it became if it did not successfully revolt against the cultures it grew out of.

Enrica: What freedom is built in a improvisation? 

Freedom from time and traditional accuracy. Most young musicians are schooled in traditions where accuracy were the measurement dividing good from bad. Growing up, meeting the option of improvisation can give a tremendous experience of freedom. The yearly held RARA festival of improvised music on Sicily is an example of how strong the improvised scene in Europe has become. There 20 musicians from all over the world gather in order to play together. Most of the concerts are free improvised and most of the ensembles are put together by the curator of the festival, Alessandro Vicard. The result is groups where people who often never have played together must find a common path through a set. Often a group can be heard to reflect styles from free jazz, noise, ambient and free art music. When successful a set of highly inspired improvisation on a high level can be created.

Enrica: What rules are applied? 

There are rules and there are no rules. Let me give you an example. One main rule of improvised music is that it has to be music of the moment. In other words: you do not bring written music, you avoid pre recorded samples and you create the energy by listening to the other players as hard as you can.

But it would not be improvisation if such rules were not challenged. There is no sense in trying to draw clear lines between styles in any art form. When it comes to improvised music, the variations are limitless. I have recently started a project with the Swedish bassist Anders Berg that has resulted in several digital releases. Our recordings contain us playing our instruments, electronic manipulations of these instruments, radio soundscapes, passages of recordings from other projects that date often years back as well as pure computer generated sounds. But when you listen to it if feels natural to label it improvised music. Maybe sometime in the future those labels become obsolete.

Enrica: I care especially the look “legal" of the creative (wrongly, improvisation is considered free from all constraints)

In my view, as explained above, “free from all constraints does not exist”. The freedom is relative to something. It relates to earlier music, musicing and other impressions. In a certain sense “free from all constraint” or even “non-idiomatic improvisation” are themselves aesthetic concepts that the musician who tries to practice them must live up to or relate to.

In my head improvised music is a form of “stretching”. We start from what we are, what we played and what we listened to and dig and we comment it, sometimes so thoroughly that it is turned inside out.

At some point, practitioners of the art of free improvisation start commenting the idioms of free improvisation itself, and things start to become really interesting.

Wherever the development of improvisation is heading, I feel it has an important mission. It opens rooms in established styles of music, it opens the minds of the players and not least it can open the mind of the listener.

I have a friend who cannot live without music. But the music he listens to is narrative music, tunes with a singer singing a song with an obvious meaning. His music is there to make it easy to listen to the singer. At a whole, the music leads the listener pleasantly through the next four minutes. Being my friend and a curious social scientist he wants to understand the music I play. I tried to explain, but he still could not get anything out of listening to it. Not before I understood that he needed other listening methods than he uses when he listens to the artists he loves (and grew up with). He took my listening lessons quite serious. After a while he came back with a “I have no way to explain your music, Tellef, but at least you have taught me to listen to it. I think the key was not to look for one common timeline in a piece, but in stead treat it as a condition or sometimes a soundscape that surrounds you”.