[NewMusic] Booking / 'Usual Suspects'

[Phillip Greenlief]

-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Matt J. Ingalls
Subject: Re: [NewMusic] Booking / 'Usual Suspects'

> PG:
> Well, I don't see such a radical difference here in improv vs.
> composition. Composition is "fixed" - it speculates that given a
setting
> of predetermined musical choices, one can predict the outcomes. In the
> case of improvisation, the speculation is that anything can happen.

but just because it *can* does not mean that it *will* happen.

PG:
Yes, I went on to argue that very point later in my missive.
 
^^^^^^^^^
> On the other hand, if I were to put together a group of improvisers
and
> we got together and played once a month - I have a feeling the music
> would be more predictable than the "predetermined" music we came up

but as an audience member i could care less. i just want to hear 
something amazing!  i want to be surprised - and it seems much easier to

predertmine that leave it up to chance.

PG:
My point was in response to Matthew's post about the 5 Spot, et. al -
that by giving musicians a stand on which to play regularly allows the
predetermined work to grow...my point is that it doesn't matter whether
or not the music is pre-determined - if a group plays regularly, they
get into some really amazing stuff. At least that's how it seems to
work...of course, there are exceptions. But I think most of us that play
improvised music figure out who we "can depend on" and who we can not
depend on to raise the bar, tweak the expectations and make some great
music.

> Damon's point is a good one - playing around with lots of different
> people kind of creates this meta-band (which is what Raskin and I
> discovered in the 2+2 construct - everyone seems to speak this
> "language" that is developing), where certain practices are fluid and
> easily transferable across a variety of groups. I like that - and
again,
> it sort of emphasizes the "usual suspects" routine - but in the bay
> area, that list of usual suspects is pretty large - and that's a
> beautiful thing, IMO.

yea, i would say its more like a meta-composition
or rules of engagement - totally NOT "anything can happen"

-m

PG: Again, I thought I was arguing that same point. It seems I clearly
failed to communicate that idea.