Mujitsu and Tairaku's Shakuhachi BBQ

free improv is tough. He is doing his thing , will time will get better.

Also, i want to point out that- the more chops you have, the better you control the instrument & also knowing the tradition of the music (Free Jazz) , the better and more convincing he will sound.
(what i mean by knowing, is to really do the homework , learn solos by ear , play along with them , lots of work ;-)


G

Last edited by geni (2010-09-29 21:46:05)

Frankly, I think he's just farting around.

But what do I know...?

Moran from Planet X wrote:

geni wrote:

Also, i want to point out that- the more chops you have, the better you control the instrument & also knowing the tradition of the music (Free Jazz) , the better and more convincing he will sound.
(what i mean by knowing, is to really do the homework , learn solos by ear , play along with them , lots of work ;-)

Yes!

And I'm going to take your statement about 'knowing the tradition of the music (Free Jazz)' literally— Good place to start http://www.ornettecoleman.com/.

No need, just go to youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mto9EaN2pbM

I see a lot of similarity to Sabu Orimo's stuff in there... or vice-versa, because those Chicago guys were first.

I like the term "non-idiomatic improvisation".

I don't think Derek Bailey coined the term but his book on improvisation is where I first heard it. These days I'm partial to improvisation that shows no sign of jazz structures - up to a point even most of the more outside jazz players still retain identifiable "jazz" elements, usually in rhythm but not always. I can only think of a few who have broken away, such as Anthony Braxton's later, more recent stuff (as opposed to most of his earlier stuff), maybe Sonny Sharrock and a few others. It was interesting to see a recent interview with Braxton on youtube, where the young interviewer kept trying to paint him back into the corner of his "angry African" phase - Braxton made himself perfectly clear that he was no longer beholden to that, or even to "jazz", I think he actually even used the term "Post African" - that Stockhausen coined (and got flack for) - to describe where he was trying to go.

Every time myself or someone else posts Sabu material here it turns into a broader discussion about "tradition" vs. whatever, whether what he's doing is legitimate or not, in a traditional or experimental context, or what is. So that in itself is worth something.

Last edited by ABRAXAS (2010-09-30 12:32:19)

Moran from Planet X wrote:

radi0gnome wrote:

No need, just go to youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mto9EaN2pbM

I see a lot of similarity to Sabu Orimo's stuff in there... or vice-versa, because those Chicago guys were first.

Well, I think the African Pygmies who these guys got a lot of their inspiration from and Raashan Roland Kirk would have been fine examples too. But I'm not talking about AEC's ability to pull off a deep African drag performance. Their music is another thing altogether, and deep into real tradition. These aren't a bunch of mooks who just decided to go to the local ethnic music store and pick up some goat rattles or the pawn shop for broken saxophones to make "Free Jazz" performance art. These guys are trained musicians, based in a variety of related Jazz traditions making music and drawing from years of musical training.

Very good point, maybe that is why Sabu Orimo is avoiding having his music being labeled as "jazz". There does seem to be a law in the avant-garde world that to have any credibility an artist has to have proved that he can handle the standard repertoire. The standard repertoire for classical flute being Bach, Mozart, Chaminade, Poulenc, Hindemith, and such, and every flute player trying to emulate Robert Dick knows they have to learn that too to be taken seriously. Free jazz players seem to have to be able to rule at the more mundane jazz styles before being given attention. 

Moran from Planet X wrote:

I could be totally wrong about Sabu Orimo. Maybe he's the real deal who's learned his art and paid his dudes. Or maybe he's just another guy who imagines himself to be a Free Music performance artist in bad drag.

His lack of advanced technique may only be apparent to more sophisticated audience members and may alter the perceptions of advanced shakuhachi players. He does seem to be doing something right, like I said, I found the first part of that youtube of him (and the singer) to be something I wanted to listen too. Does a good performance or good music necessarily mean that the performer is technically awesome? It's obviously not true for popular music, why does it have to be true for less popular music?

He's probably closer to being a "punk" shakuhachi player than a trained one. He obviously is aware of the tradition, having studied with Okuda, and has rejected it in favor of exploring the flute on his own terms. If he couldn't even handle studying with Okuda then he's probably not ready for the tradition.

I like the poster of General Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing the Viet Cong prisoner in the background!

Tairaku 太楽 wrote:

He's probably closer to being a "punk" shakuhachi player than a trained one.

Really, you'd class him as punk? Punk musicians I've been exposed to (The Ramones, The Clash, Crime, Sex Pistols, The Minutemen, etc) seem to know their instruments and have some clear rooting in rock and blues — however spare their playing or pared down/amped up their expression.

Tairaku 太楽 wrote:

He obviously is aware of the tradition, having studied with Okuda, and has rejected it in favor of exploring the flute on his own terms. If he couldn't even handle studying with Okuda then he's probably not ready for the tradition.

You're very generous. How long did he study with Okuda? A few months? Christ, at Okuda's pace I wonder if he even finished learning the first line of the first piece (only kidding, you Okuda-ites)!

It's all good and fine to "explore" on your own, but that doesn't automatically elevate you to the status of an artist. Kids explore themselves all the time, should we consider them anatomists? Should I consider myself an electrical engineer because I can solder a wire to a circuit board?

As I said, you are very generous.

Last edited by Moran from Planet X (2010-10-01 00:39:00)

Take it from a librarian, man, don't rely on Wikipedia for your facts/knowledge.  Just saying... anyone can put anything up on those pages - doesn't have to be factual, or correct... now back to your regularly...

Aesthetically speaking, in a post-modern art world, everyone is an artist... in a non-traditional way... AND there is not a difference between exploring and musicking, necessarily.  It all depends on how you cut the mustard. Art is non-art and non-art is art.

A friend of mine gave me one of his CDs about 2 years ago - I am not certain I made it through the first half of it- and I never have gone back to it. 

But, I am a traditionalist, in a non-traditional way... which happens to be pretty traditional in shakuhachi, so I am traditional!

Last edited by madoherty (2010-10-01 00:17:36)

radi0gnome wrote:

But Sabu Orimo is an artist. When I look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art I see that "Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging symbolic elements in a way that influences and affects the senses, emotions, and/or intellect." I believe that Sabu Orimo succeeded in doing that well. In my opinion it's a results oriented kind of thing, it's not as if he solely labeled himself as an artist, there are people listening and seeing it as art, and he has made waves in the artistic community.

Holy crappola. If Brian wants to give the guy a nickel, you'll just throw in the whole store, huh?

I once saw a young female gorilla at the L.A. Zoo making repeated parenthetical marks in the mud with a stick ((())). With a stick! I thought to myself, "Self, that gorilla is making art!"

But we seriously digress. The question isn't about "art" it's about what makes an artist and why we should acknowledge them. A lot of people or things can create 'art' according to the simplified stimulus-and-response Wiki definition that you quote.

But — without going to Wiki — what do you think constitutes being an artist?

---------------------------------

(Why would I stick up for Ornette the Noise Man, or Tairaku the Noise Man and not Sabu the Noise Man?)

Last edited by Moran from Planet X (2010-10-01 01:20:58)

edosan wrote:

Moran from Planet X wrote:

what do you think constitutes being an artist?

Having enough people like your stuff so you don't starve to death?

End of History (with profound apologies to Horst).

Okay, well, that ties nicely into the craftsman aspect of being an artist, or non-being of an artist, as the case may be.

We'll give you 3 points for that answer.

Moran from Planet X wrote:

radi0gnome wrote:

But Sabu Orimo is an artist. When I look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Art I see that "Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging symbolic elements in a way that influences and affects the senses, emotions, and/or intellect." I believe that Sabu Orimo succeeded in doing that well. In my opinion it's a results oriented kind of thing, it's not as if he solely labeled himself as an artist, there are people listening and seeing it as art, and he has made waves in the artistic community.

Holy crappola. If Brian wants to give the guy a nickel, you'll just throw in the whole store, huh?

I once saw a young female gorilla at the L.A. Zoo making repeated parenthetical marks in the mud with a stick ((())). With a stick! I thought to myself, "Self, that gorilla is making art!"

If the gorilla was doing so in a way that "influences and affects the senses, emotions, and/or intellect", I'd say it was art. Notice that the definition does not mention anything about intent.

Moran from Planet X wrote:

But we seriously digress. The question isn't about "art" it's about what makes an artist and why we should acknowledge them. A lot of people or things can create 'art' according to the simplified stimulus-and-response Wiki definition that you quote.

Also notice that the Wikipedia definition doesn't give any indication about what makes "good" art. I'd say that the artist needs to be creating at a certain level of "goodness" before being acknowledged.  That could possibly be determined by how much the art "influences and affects the senses, emotions, and/or intellect".   

Moran from Planet X wrote:

But — without going to Wiki — what do you think constitutes being an artist?

The wikipedia definition of art suits me fine, but other than that, I'd say I couldn't define it, but I'd know it when I see (or hear) it. Of course, the artist is the entity creating the art.

Moran from Planet X wrote:

(Why would I stick up for Ornette the Noise Man, or Tairaku the Noise Man and not Sabu the Noise Man?)

Tell me you know the answer and I'll try to guess.

Last edited by radi0gnome (2010-10-01 09:25:52)