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

on 10/19/03 6:04 PM, jim & nika at ultimatefrog@comcast.net wrote:

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.

It sure does. Although I've found you synthesize a whole other "heat of the moment" thing in your mind if you're going to make it work. That said, this is exactly why I have avoided solo guitar for the most part. Also, I don;t know if communicating with your audience in the live sense is always the answer. Novelists don't communicate in the live sense, yet a great many novels have immediacy and heat of the moment urgency. Bill Evans' solo stuff is definitely not about communicating to the audience that way, and his is some of the most effective and personal music ever. Of course, the dialogue you feel with an audience who reacts is as powerful as anything you can get when you're going one on one alone with the music. I think both are beautiful to have.

And I don't think communication is necessarily equivalent to pandering to an audience's thirst for showy licks.

History has proven it's not exactly a foreign notion, and certainly no small part of the improvising community. I've seen musicians of every musical stripe do it. It's often part of the job, if you're taking people's money for the service of doing music for their entertainment. And let's not delude ourslves -- the music we're talking about is consumed on an entertainment level. Also, I don't think "showy licks" are the only way by which performers press the buttons. Check out some of Miles' remarks on Keith Jarrett, just for starters. skip h