ONLY ONE SKY
CORRECT TRUTH
Tyshawn Sorey
Koan
482 Music : 2009
TS, drums; Todd Neufeld, electric and classical guitars; Thomas Morgan, double bass and classical guitar.
We’re pleased to continue previews of extraordinary upcoming albums with several tracks from Tyshawn Sorey’s Koan, which will be released in September on 482 Music.
Tyshawn Sorey is best known as an extraordinary drummer, having performed with Muhal Richard Abrams, Mark Helias, Butch Morris, Steve Lehman, Dave Douglas, Steve Coleman, Wadada Leo Smith, and many others. The New York Times recently dubbed him one of “five drummers whose time is now.” But Sorey’s composition skills are equally formidable, evidenced on his work in Fieldwork (a collaborative project with Steve Lehman and Vijay Iyer) and his solo debut That/Not.
He’s taken a new turn on Koan – de-emphasizing drums, spotlighting guitars, and embracing an almost minimalist aesthetic. The tunes are hauntingly spare, radiating a gentle beauty where each gesture carries maximum weight. You can get a sense of the album’s range from the brief solo guitar piece “Only One Sky” and the open improvisational environment of “Correct Truth.”
This deeply challenging music demands to be taken on its own terms. In his essay “Music and Meaning” – to be released later this year in John Zorn’s Arcana IV – Tyshawn writes: “I want to create music for a person who simply listens without desire for anything, appreciating the sounds simply for what they are, not necessarily for what they do.” Koan fulfills this Zen challenge.
And now we turn it over to Tyshawn, for more background on this fascinating music:
DE-EMPHASIZING THE DRUMS
Part of this has to do with my avoidance of hierarchy in the overall shape of the music on this album. As a drummer, I’d like to think of myself as being equal to the compositional design and to the other improvisers, whether I compose the music or not. Similarly, in a more radical way, I’ve began creating compositions that can be performed with OR without drums… because in my music, I feel that the drums are becoming less important. Composition would be my feature “instrument,” perhaps.
But that does not mean that there will NEVER be any recordings of my music where my drumming IS featured. My work as a composer deals with many different ideas and encompasses many different types of music. It is now only a matter of having the opportunity available to document as much of these ideas – so that my work as a drummer OR as a composer is not seen as going only in one direction.
TODD NEUFELD AND THOMAS MORGAN
This was a project that the three of us mutually wanted to do for some time, but could never get around to it due to our consistently busy schedules. However, through Thomas’ recommendation, we were finally brought together in a quartet led by Swiss trombonist Samuel Blaser in late 2007. I felt that the connection among the three of us was there, from the very first note, as if we were playing together for many years. The point was to create an intimate musical environment in which the three of us can articulate our musical personalities in the most natural way possible. The music is about the three of us – TOGETHER.
NO FRONT LINE
I wanted to do a recording that had no front line of any sort, because I thought that we were already covering so much ground as improvisers, both collectively and in our own right, and that it was not necessary to add more to the mix. Todd and Thomas are musicians who, in my opinion, make careful musical decisions, but in the most natural way – with no particular agenda or goal that can create a potential negative effect on the music.
IMPROV/COMPOSITION
The music I wrote for this session did not require any extensive rehearsal. Due to our busy schedules, we somehow managed to have only one short rehearsal before going into the studio! The reason I wanted to do it this way was because I wanted to record the music while it was still fresh and not over-rehearsed. Most of the tracks were done in one or two takes. It’s certainly the first time I’ve ever done a session like this. My intent with Koan was to do something drastically different from That/Not, my previous recording of music using more elaborate forms and intricate through-composed pieces.
Compositionally, I want to create a music where everything changes, and nothing changes, at the same time. The music should make it possible for those listening to lose all sense of place and time outside of the music itself.
KOAN LIVE
We will be performing at The Stone on August 5 at 10 p.m., and on August 28 at 10 p.m. with special guest Masabumi Kikuchi (piano) – these are the first and last performances of the year with both of these groups.
Those in NY and vicinity, get your Sorey on in August. Tyshawn Sorey is curating the month of August at The Stone, and debuting a new multi-chapter work there entitled “Wu-Wei.” This will be a remarkable chance to see Sorey in a variety of contexts.
Massimo Magee // Jul 23, 2009 at 6:36 pm
What I want to know is, if he’s interested in “working toward an “unspoiled” state of musical consciousness” and “engendering a direct spontaneity in music making”, why does he need a compositional framework at all? The two concepts seen entirely at odds to me – the one focussed on a totally organic meeting of equal individuals interested in making a music of the moment with no larger agenda, and the other being an over-arching control mechanism originated by (and credited solely to, as the cover bears witness) the one person, steering it where he wants it to go……
Tyshawn Sorey // Jul 23, 2009 at 7:26 pm
Hi Massimo,
Thanks for your comment. To make things clearer, what I am saying is this:
Firstly, the compositional framework involved in my music is just that. I don’t necessarily have the power or the desire to, as you put it, “steer it where I want it to go.” We would try different ways of playing these pieces, and figure out together what would be the best way to play them, whether I am the person who writes the music or not.
Secondly, if you see the two concepts being entirely at odds with each other – fine. I have nothing to do with how you experience music, for you and I do not experience listening in the same exact way…in fact no two listeners do. For me, I’m speaking in my experience… Composition to me has nothing to do with “control” – however, if you see it as such, then that’s how you see it… The music I create is not a means to “control” where the music goes… We simply play what is in accordance to the score, and when we get to improvise (whether or not we are basing it on the compositional material), we simply let the improvisation develop out of its’ own volition [hence my use of the phrase "direct spontaneity"]. When it comes to the improvised sections of any of the music, I never tell the musicians what to play (other than the written score), because as I’ve said – I think of myself as an equal to the other performers…in that we do not share a larger agenda.
Thirdly – as far as creating a compositional framework and working towards an unspoiled state… This music incorporates both, in a way of which neither idea takes precedence over another. Sort of in between, if you don’t mind my saying so… For me, it’s neither “this” nor “that.” Yes, I did write the scores to the music…but it is not as important as one might think, as far as any technical details are concerned. For me, the fact that I even wrote the scores is besides the point. It is more about the sound and how we can create together during the improvisational AND the interpretive sections of any one composition… The quality of this, of course, is contingent on the amount of TRUST we have together – which I don’t need to discuss here, you can “hear” the trust. But as I’ve said, depending on the listener’s experience, they can choose to let the music speak to them in whatever way they wish to. I’m only explaining how I think of this…
Thanks again,
T.
Massimo Magee // Jul 23, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Tyshawn,
Thanks very much for your detailed – and very prompt – reply! The propositions you put forward are obviously the result of much thought and consideration, and I’m all for recognising the power of paradoxes, it just seems to me that making music that is all about “what is happening in the now” (which is also a goal very dear to my own heart and my own musical endeavours) while at the same time using a compositional framework is a little like saying you want to get across town as fast as possible but also that you only want to go by horse & cart. For one thing, the composition must necessarily be divorced entirely from the ‘moment’ in which you are playing (and, crucially, improvising) during the recording sessions – since it must have been composed at another time and in another place.
It just seems that improvising without compositions would be so much closer to what you want to do than you writing out a framework beforehand at another time and place and having other people play that framework with you. Regardless of whether or not you consciously steer the performance of the compositions in the moment of performance, the marks on the page in front of the three of you were made by your hand.
Maybe I’m too devoted to total improvisation, maybe we just hear things differently, like you said. The pieces certainly sound great – I especially liked ‘Correct Truth’. It’s just when I know what you were aiming for and I know there’s a composed framework in place (and you can hear it, although that’s not always important) something just gets in the way for me
.
What I am curious about though is what “the notions associated with so-called free improvisation” that you referred to are.
Thanks again,
Massimo
Chris M // Jul 24, 2009 at 1:34 am
Thanks for the heads-up. Looking forward to this. I very much enjoyed his previois effort.
C
gaston // Jul 31, 2009 at 3:21 pm
Massimo,
Your questions for Tyshawn remind me of the old debate about the place of language in thinking. There is no simple way of describing where the “old” or inherited aspects of our thinking/acting leave off and the “new” or spontaneous elements begin. But it is problematic to suggest that we can be wholly free and “in the now” without residue or reference to where we’ve been.
Might you think of composition, in Tyshawn’s sense, as more of a ruse than a structure or as a window frame opening into a vista?
Massimo Magee // Aug 1, 2009 at 12:10 am
gaston,
“But it is problematic to suggest that we can be wholly free and “in the now” without residue or reference to where we’ve been.”
but we can -Try-, just as hard as we can. And this is what makes all the difference. It seems to me that if you’re trying to make music “in the now” as an improvised collective experience between 3 people, at the same time following a framework composed by one member at a different time and place seems like shooting yourself in the foot. My issue is I see (and hear) the potential here for something even more powerful by being totally improvised.
lovely-sounding music though, as I said.
Tyshawn Sorey // Aug 6, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Thanks for these insightful comments!
In my opinion, the question of whether or not the music was composed in a different time/place has no place here. Because, even if the compositional framework WAS written during a different time and place, there are indeterministic factors associated in EACH performance of the music that alter the structure of the composition…and this is also done collaboratively (it would almost have to be, if we wish for each performance to be different every time). NO two performances will ever sound the same, unless I hire robots to play it – which is a different matter. So, it is always “in the now”, as far as I’m concerned.
I need to reiterate that we hear things differently based on our experiences, so there is no right or wrong answer, as far as I’m concerned. As I attempted to explain earlier, the framework is only that…it is up to us as a group to make it OUR framework, and there are far too many examples of this for me to go into… It seems to me that you can make music “in the now”, whether you have composed material or not – but I am not suggesting that this is THE way to look at things. There is no ONE way, because – we’ve different experiences in looking at things.
I totally agree that total improvisation is, for me, a great way to get a powerful result. However, I still don’t agree that a composition by any human being in the ensemble invalidates the music on any level, especially if the music is flexible enough for the interpreters to mold and make it their own – TOGETHER…even in the most subtle way. Would it be wrong, for instance, to speak of Roscoe Mitchell’s music [for example - or anyone's composed music, for that matter] as being “in the now”, even though he composed the music in a different time and place, and the chosen interpreters for that music make that music THEIRS – and together?
If the answer is yes, then it can best be summed up in the following way:
ANY composer/performer’s experience making music (in hopes of attaining a powerful result) with their collaborators is not necessarily” in the now”; perhaps, it’s an invalid experience of sorts…?
Anyway, thanks again! And I hope you enjoy the music.
S.R. // Aug 11, 2009 at 10:34 pm
While I do not know how these compositions were ‘notated’ or ’scribed’ I do think that ‘writing’ music is a way of ciphering or coding so that when the instrumentalist is TRANSLATING the ciphering, he is then to a degree (para)improvising … by decoding (even if the material is practiced and prepared very much by the instrumentalist) you impart a SEMANTIC valuation to ‘the score’. While music is neither hither nor thither in respects to Language as a means of communication or transference, by encoding a textual function to the music (i.e., the score) one can almost create an ‘other’ to the music. i.e. You’re giving the music that is going to be translated it’s ’shadow’.
Sorry this is a bit hermetic, but there are many tangential spokes that can emanate from the pleroma of ‘written compositon’ into the domanin of musical actualization/translation
-S.R.
S.R. // Aug 12, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Also, Massimo,
your muscle memory and it’s peripherals were formed at another time and place … so … when you’re improvising, don’t think that you’re exactly in the moment … you’re OUT of the moment … to a degree…that is if you’re muscle memory is such that it is highly developed and allows you to interconnect your techniques together to create syntheses of muscle memories and it’s peripherals and outliers.
Massimo Magee // Aug 13, 2009 at 5:19 am
S.R.
Don’t think for a second I forgot that, it’s something I battle every day, but it doesn’t mean I’m not /Trying/ as hard as I can, whatever way I can, to be as much ‘in the moment’ as I can be, and I believe following a composed outline pulls one away from that even more than these ‘muscle memories’ do (which, as I said, must also be struggled against). Deflecting discussion to another obstacle doesn’t invalidate the first obstacle as an obstacle (at least in my view, clearly not in Mr. Sorey’s), but nice try