I've been to performances where the audience was awed into silence by the performers (not even applauding until the very end), but there was an impressive exchange of energy between the artists and the audience. I saw this in a quartet led by Joseph Jarman doing an improv set. I doubt that this energy could have existed in the album they were recording concurrently. Mono (on Tzadik) also achieved this silent dialogue with the stunned into silence audience. Even if they wanted to cheer or say anything they wouldn't have been heard over the music. Mono's recordings have not achieved this energy. The "classic" Miles quintet was never really on in the studio (IMHO), but live...phew. Zach -----Original Message----- From: zorn-list-bounces@mailman.xmission.com [mailto:zorn-list-bounces@mailman.xmission.com] On Behalf Of jim & nika Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2003 8:05 PM To: zorn-list@mailman.xmission.com Subject: studio v live As far as improv in a studio setting goes, perhaps we could make a distinction between solo and group dynamics. Group playing demands, as skip pointed out, communication between group members whereas solo work implies a communication between the solo performer and his/her audience. Having just completed a solo improv project, I must confess that the lack of audience energy/feedback has the potential for de-railing a performance. And I don't think communication is necessarily equivalent to pandering to an audience's thirst for showy licks. jim mcauley _______________________________________________ zorn-list mailing list zorn-list@mailman.xmission.com To UNSUBSCRIBE or Change Your Subscription Options, go to the webpage below http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/zorn-list