S. Wilson comment on Professional Musicians

Davesax1965 wrote: ... At this stage, you tend to "grok" things. Look it up. "The ability to look at an object and automatically know instinctively what it is without an explanation". I don't know what Stage 5 is, but I look forwards to finding out. Music is not really about individual musicians, it's about being an individual and learning to develop and express yourself in that manner. Do I listen to a lot of music ? I hear it. Do I, as a musician, strip it back, analyse it, incorporate it, re-use it in a different form or as an adjunct to what I do ? Rarely. I have a developed musical vocabulary. I don't need to re-invent the wheel.

The main learning tool for this is "concentration" which is inversely proportional to the amount of time spent learning something. Meaning that sometimes you learn faster than others, depending on how much your thinking mind is in the way or not.

This is hard to discuss with musicians, since they tend to be defensive, and not able to discuss what they do intelectually (not all of them!), as writers and painters tend to do a bit more, even if their work is intuitive. Musicians, I THINK, are way too tied up and insecure with the work they do, to be able to open up like this. However, this is not the case with the more successful and experienced folks out there.

IF, you get the chance, look for a DVD called "The Tightrope", and when you are watching it, remember that someone is playing music to it along side (you won't quite notice that until later!), and is basically working the music with the actor that is trying the exercise ... and adjusting is the hard part ... which most musicians are not capable of doing because no one seems to know how to create exercises to sharpen up your ear, so you learn to adjust on the fly, and not have to wait for your mind to catch up with the notes or the chords! Music theory and musicians, will tend to tell you that you can not do this, because only this or that set of notes can fit in this second, and you don't have the time to bring these up from your inner self, thus, the part gets left behind, and the music has a slight hesitation that sounds like a mistake, but it is thought as not being one. Or, there is a transition that is not quite in sync, and most simply use a pause to get into it, instead of blending it.

All in all, I think, from a directing stand point that this is a matter of comfort between the art and the artist. And this is where many "intuitive" folks have an easier time ... they are already "there", whereas one rarely thinks of a single person in an orchestra as being "there" as a part of the music. Rock'n'roll is even worse on that account, not to mention the ego. jazz ... gets into the boring side of things, when it's all notes and chords and not music ... and it is obvious the folks playing have no idea what the concept of flying free in music is all about. Ask Miles about that!

I doubt he would work with anyone that did not have the sensitivity and ability to learn/feel new things, and being able to play them back ... you can the part you played off the score sheet ... but all of a sudden the accents and the feelings are missing! And this is where acting is stronger, because it is about elevating that moment with what you just did, not bringing it down, note wise, or letter/word wise!

I think you will like the film ... it's advanced acting at its best. And it has music with it, which Peter Brook has always used in his work, though it may come off with a word I want to use ... minimalist ... though I never thought the music was minimal to the whole content, or outside of that content ... it just seems to be perfect with it. And this is what "magic" is all about!

Davesax1965 wrote: Mosh, it's hard to discuss with musicians as non musicians don't necessarily have that level of understanding. ;-)

To help clarify my words, since they do get mis-understood ... it's not that they do not have an understanding ... I think about the translation between their knowledge and the actual playing ... where the "zen" person, is able to do these things fairly easily ... see that film, and you will go ... yep ... Mosh is right!

It's not about the low level or high level of musicianship ... there is something else, that both new and old players and actors and painters and what not ... ALL have, but these bits do not always develop.

Davesax1965 wrote: ...When musicians point this out to non musicians, words like "defensive" and "elitist" get thrown around. Which is just utterly stupid, but there you go. It's like someone going into a room full of dentists and telling them how to do their job "as they have seen teeth before". Yeah, well.

Again, misunderstood. I come into a group of writers and tell Hesse, that I thought that a large part of his novel Steppenprog, is about the social consciousness of the monkey in a zoo ... he has the option of saying not really, or saying ... wow ... or saying ... right on ... another member of the magic theater. You're basically saying that because you know notes and chords and I don't, that I would not know what to feel and think ... and I can say the same thing about my words in poetry, or my words in a novel about you or anyone else. Or my paints on a canvas ... and that is NOT what the discussion is about, and not what I wanted to convey.

Davesax1965 wrote: ... It's not about"concentration". You do not learn music as if it's a problem in physics or mathematics. I can hear concentration in a modal John Coltrane sax solo, but that's not the music. ...

This is only visible in rehearsal, and you need a "director" to help you catch it, because a recorder is not external enough for you to see more than just your own. Concentration that I am discussing here is different and is actually about the "learning" before you get to the Coltrane point. You skipped the part that helps take you there ... that's cheating (hehehe!!!)

Davesax1965 wrote: ... At a certain stage, playing becomes like Zen archery. It's extremely difficult to explain. If that sounds elitist or defensive, it's merely a correct statement. ...

Weird that you can not recognize another zen right next to you!

Davesax1965 wrote: ...This is also probably why I don't like dissecting other people's music or engaging in endless comparatives ...

Incorrect. I nevver stated that one is better than the other. I have provided a PARALLEL ... that many folks are not willing to play with or check, because it is so foreigh to their "language" ... however, I do not have different words to explain it.

I never said that literature or painting is better than music ... all art is art for me, regardless of the vessel, and you separated it, not me.

Davesax1965 wrote: ... I pick up a sax. Someone plays something. I play along automatically. I don't think about moving my fingers. I don't think about scales or keys, my mind reacts to the music and music comes out. I don't "listen" in detail to a lot of musicians as I've already heard so much that I know what's coming.

Now go walk the "tightrope" while playing ... I guarantee you there is some learning there ... it doesn't matter if you have been married that long or not, or if sex is now stale ... don't corner yourself and your ability!

Davesax1965 wrote: ... You lost the fear of making mistakes AND it allowed you to go off on your own trail of consciousness. Nothing you hear in proper, good jazz is consciously thought through. It is *experience* and the result of someone becoming a musician within themselves. ...

Most "advanced" acting exercises are exactly about teaching you this. I just find it sad that some folks in music think that only 40 years of experience and 10 thousand naysayers can help you learn this. You can and it's available, a lot of which depending on one's ability to communicate and be open to ideas and other thoughts ... I won't say "concepts" because they are not "concepts", and most learning in these advanced areas has nothing to do with concepts but with individual details that add to what you do.

Since nothing else can help you, and my words are empty ... shut the door! Only a Mack truck, God and the master of the universe can teach?

It's not (even) about me teaching anything, but as an exercise and a chance to try something else ... the minute the door is shut, the number of opportunites to free yourself ... drop off ... and yeah, to use one of your expressions, it's very Zen ... and one of the important things is to never create the boxes, because it will be heck finding the boxes that ends all boxes in the end! ... stuck in a circle!

Davesax1965 wrote: ... They are programmed to respond in that way through years of listening to people and living "being a musician". Most new musicians think there is a formula and/ or a process.... the formulaic approach never works as you have to spend time thinking the formula through....

The only thing one can really teach is a "process", and one hopes that the teacher is strong enough to tell the student that somewhere along the line you have to throw the process away, or the music never develops and changes. The book will be the same. The music will be the same. The actor will be the same.

Davesax1965 wrote: ... There's another quote about improvisation - "In composition, you have a lifetime of experience to fill a 15 second solo. In improvisation, you have 15 seconds".

Robert Wyatt's is way better about Syd Barrett. I'll leave you to look for it, because it is a brain scorcher ... and takes things out of context so fast, it's not funny ... and it tells you that some people learn, and play, and do ... not the way you and I think!

I also mentioned there was no time to think, btw! In Pinter you have 1 minute plus to think. In Shakespeare, about 15 seconds. In Albee, you have about 3 seconds ... there is no time limit for this, because sometimes a pause makes sense, and sometimes it doesn't, and you might not know this until way later ...

Again, if you have the chance, please see "The Tightrope" and bring your saxophone with it!

rdtprog wrote: ...  that make me think about what he meant when he said : "89% of professional musicians that i know stop listening to music when they become musicians, which it's not my case" ... My own understanding right now is that he must think that to do "good music" , you have to be inspired by the music you're listening while you're trying to create your own music. Am i on the right track? Maybe musicians can have a better understanding of this...

Going back to your original statement, my apologies for the overly long parts below ... but it is one thing that few agree on, and musicians, are known to be the most stubborn bunch, because they know what they do, and they tend to believe, that painters, writers, actors and other "artists" are morons that can not think and work, and that their "process" is not as detailed and important as that shown in music.

Nothing could be further from the truth ... with one exception. In writing a novel, or a poem, I do not worry about the language, grammar, or your comment or any other idea or concept ... I let my characters run a muck and do their own thing, and they resolve things on their own. I'm considered "rude" (or worse, not intelligent and totally off my rocker) because I write and say, something that at one time, was considered ... the writings of the devil ... and was punish'able by a witch burn or some other salacious event, like some word'ing here. Therefore, I must be wrong, as were all the mystics before me. Or Zen poluted idealism, the Alan Watts kind, if not someother middle class ideal!

You do not need to listen to other music ... it might help that you "know" that something else is out there, that you do not know about and understand, and that you have an inner open-ness to find many of these moments in your own playing, just like I do in my poetry and my writing ... never the same next week ... which, at times, you can say is nerve wrecking!

SW is very smart, and he is musically "educated" in more ways than one ... but he could easily tell you that he says that because in talking to Klaus Schulze, Daevid Allen, Peter Hammill and many other "individualistic styled" musicians, they rarely spend time listening to anything because they already have way too much music in side of them as it is ... you can't say that KS is the same as 40 years ago ... or better or worse, or the same ... he's neither. The same for DA and PH ... and this is not something that many folks can handle ... specially when it is not a commercially viable "known" piece of music, or artist.

Musicians, like any other artist, don't have a better "understanding of this", anymore than I or anyone else about what we do ... we like to think we do, and justify with a few words, but I guarantee you that tomorrow, these words would be slightly different, and this is the part that we ignore, and would rather state that others are wrong, than appreciate the differences.

What we ALL do, comes from as many million places in teh universe as there are people trying. And bringing it down to "one idea", "one concept" is futile and silly. Just like we all are!