This is part 2 of my interview with Ezra Buchla. After we talked about his impression of the AE Modular system we went on to talk about the state of the music electronics business and how to go about becoming a better musician by focusing more on listening practice.
I feel that this part has given me the most things to think about and certainly has already changed the way I appreciate music in general and the works of the composers that he mentions specifically.
Wow, yeah, that was very insightful and inspiring! I only recently started to get into ambient music and this deep listening is indeed difficult, but rewarding.
I agree, NightMachines , some interesting and strong views expressed in that interview.
Thank you, careck , for taking the time to hold the interview and to transcribe it. I know from experience that it isn't always the easiest of tasks, although it looks so simple once it's on the page.
As with all interviews that bring out strong opinions from the interviewee, we will find ourselves identifying with some and maybe not agreeing with others. I found that with this piece. That's a good thing in my opinion, as it makes the reader challenge some of their comfortable views and perceptions. Following the challenge, the view can either become tempered, or (perhaps) more strongly held.
In some ways, it reminds me of some of the interviews I've read with Edgar Froese (Tangerine Dream) and Klaus Schulze - both huge influences for me and the music that I have enjoyed for over 40 years. They both express very strong views on subjects such as "bedroom musicians" and at times it can be hard to take their implied (and sometimes brutally direct) criticism. For me, this always made my resolve greater to produce music that I personally enjoy and if someone else does too, that's a bonus. They both used/use (Edgar's now deceased) technology as a means to an end, always pushing at the edge of what was available and driving the edge through that creative thirst for something new.
To be fair, Ezra is more gentle in the way he approaches this and advocates listening as a starting point. I agree that reading "Deep Listening" by Pauline Oliverios is a good investment, it helped me to understand (and improve) something that I did naturally, but that hadn't been tagged internally. Pauline's book is one example where I challenged myself and came out of it stronger. I was introduced to the book by a music student who did a Master's thesis on her work and who interviewed me about my music. I was amazed that someone with that much training and insight would find something of value in the music that I created - another lesson learned. He received a lovely personal letter from her, taking real interest in his work.
If anyone wants to sample Pauline's book, drop me a personal message. It's really worth a read and having a copy is worthwhile, should it resonate with you.
The other aspect that arises from Ezra's interview that has resonance for me is the balance between making music and the technology to make the music. As an ex-research scientist (with training in both engineering and psychology), it's an interesting balance: in 1984, I designed and built a MIDI interface and wrote some code for a simple sequencer; and, in 2005, I undertook research to look at how adults use musical training as part of their identity. Both the technology and the psychology of music-making fascinate me and, consequently, I have to focus my limited energy on making the music that I enjoy. Reading Ezra's interview brought out his thinking on both of these areas - some points well made, I thought.
With apologies for the personal aspects there - my point is simply that I enjoyed the interview and it provoked some thinking, even though I didn't necessarily agree with everything I read Thanks again, careck .
Some people say that I write too much, I just think that I write too quickly I'm stopping now as I've finished my coffee.
Last Edit: Mar 11, 2019 9:43:23 GMT by spacedog: Typos corrected