[NewMusic] Marco Eneidi's Animal Farm

[Phillip Greenlief]

-----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Damon Smith
Subject: Re: [NewMusic] Marco Eneidi's Animal Farm

On Feb 28, 2007, at 12:36 AM, Phillip Greenlief wrote:

> Here's my point: I think Marco is a seriously advanced saxophone 
> player,
> but I'm disappointed that after all these years he has not found a
> "process" for putting his music together that is: 1) His own.

DS:
I played Jimmy's music with Marco and Karen Borca and Cecil's music 
with Cecil and in another group with Marco. Marco's music is quite a 
bit different, though coming out of that mould.  His sound is  also not 
really like Jimmy's at all, it is much grittier. The influence of 
working with Bill Dixon is also important.

PG:
I would say that your comment about coming out of the mold is accurate.
I would say that your comment that it is "quite bit different" is not
accurate. Different, yes - quite a bit different - I'm not sure. I don't
see the "obvious" connection to Bill Dixon's music...I could just as
easily say that I am influenced by Dixon's music, and that it "shows up"
in my work (but I would never say such a thing). 

This is just my opinion, which is nearly meaningless. The only reason I
wrote this missive was to try to point out some ways of dealing with the
problems of writing for large ensemble. I'm sorry if any of it came out
as a slam against Marco. I thought I made that clear from the very
beginning of my post, but I have a way of saying one thing and then
writing the opposite a few paragraphs later. 

It's the Dostoevsky influence...he was a master at saying he wasn't
going to say something and then would discuss that thing for the next 5
pages.
;-)

DS:
The notation system is efficient because it keeps the music from being 
too stiff, the same lines can have multiple rhythms and each person can 
play it their way, even though there is an original way the line goes, 
it keeps it between improvisation and composition, it is only the 
players hang ups that get in the way.
I thought the material was played well on Sunday, the problems were 
mainly just in volume.

PG:
I disagree. The notation system is not efficient.
I would agree that you can have varied results...that's nice.

But I have done the same thing with the deconstruction meditations:
using traditional notation, but reading it in an unconventional way. I
think my method is "more efficient" (if you're working with players that
read music), because someone can understand quickly what you want - then
they are free to "mess with it" as much as they want, which, in the end
result, is not so different from Marco's process. We used this method in
the sextet I had with Goldberg, et. al - when we "deconstructed" Pierrot
Lunnaire - you're looking at music, but you're not playing what you see
- you pick the notes and rhythms you want to use and compose your own
material from what's in front of you. This is ultimately what we had to
do the other night.

The difference is that it takes minutes, not hours, to rehearse using my
"process"...that's efficiency, as far as I'm concerned.