Arts & Literature

The Art of Noise

A multimedia performance at the University of Hartford is beyond repair; and a college music showcase dominates

Comments (13)
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Dan Barry photo
Triple Music: found sounds.

I very rarely use the phrase "art-damaged" to describe music, and when I do, I want you to know that the music I'm witnessing is to be avoided like SARS. I get paid to suffer through it, so I'd just as soon spare you the suffering, you know?

So I'm glad that you probably weren't at the Hartford Art School last Wednesday to see the event they called Triple Music. It sounded amazing on paper, but when I showed up to the Renée Samuels Center on the UH campus, what I found was irreparably art-damaged. Two laptops, operated by Lief Ellis and Matt Sargent, emitted glitchy synth noises and abstract video. Meanwhile, percussionist Bill Solomon tinkered with a table full of objects — some were musical instruments, and some were anything but.

I should note that all three performers in Triple Music are members of the Hartford Sound Alliance, a group interested in making boundary-pushing, media-mashing, genre-blending music. Each boasts an impressive résumé of compositions, performances, and awards — you can see for yourself at hartfordsoundalliance.com. I do not believe for a second that any of the three musicians are hacks.

That said, I hoped to hear a collaborative, organic/electronic soundtrack that interacted with video in innovative ways. I was hoping for a performance that might demonstrate that electronics could be warmer and friendlier, and percussion colder and more mechanical, than how we normally think of each. I wanted to see why and how video could be integrated, could be considered "music" as the event's name suggested. What I got was three artists so overloaded on theory that they were unable to cooperate, choosing instead to masturbate all over their audience.

Solomon futzed with a number of "found objects" that looked more like he had stolen them from the school's cafeteria than, say, thoughtfully re-purposed an everyday item. He quickly fell into a predictable pattern of picking up a given object, hitting it a few times with a stick, and putting it down to start again with the next object. There was no nuance or rhythm, no randomness or emotion. Behind him, the projector spewed out bad Stan Brakhage imitations, while Sargent's laptop barfed up bleeps and bloops. Like Solomon, Sargent offered no compelling layers of noise, no notes obscured by washes of sound — just single synth tones in serial order, scooting up or down a scale, becoming more or less grainy. The purposelessness was deafening. Without a central idea to cohere around, each artist operated in a vacuum.

 

On Saturday I saw just how much was possible when artists do cooperate. I ventured south and just across the state line to SUNY Purchase, where there was an all-day local and student concert happening at The Stood, their completely student-run Student Center. The bill was incredibly diverse: I saw an ambient, loop-based bass guitarist followed by a metal band followed by a funk/classic rock hybrid.

Metallers the Legacy Hour took the stage without their vocalist, who was still en route to the gig, and managed to slam anyway. They played Lamb of God-style straightforward metal, but every now and then they threw in some positively terrifying chugs that hinted at influences much darker and more obscure. And Charlie Philips led a funk ensemble, sounding himself like a mix of Hendrix and the Black Keys, while behind him his band was more like Galactic or Karl Denson's Tiny Universe. It was a spectacular pairing of influences. I now have serious college envy — I wish my alma's scene was that good.

 

E-mail editor@hartfordadvocate.com

Comments (13)
Post a Comment
This review misses the point. It was called Triple music because the idea was for each artist was to operate independently of each other.

Also, some components of their performance I did not see in the review: Did you happen to check out the video projection displayed in the other room, or the giant projection outside? Hardly "art damaged". Rather, I would use the words, "innovative" and "edgy".

A rather flip review that does not illustrate the whole picture laden with immature and offensive comments.
Posted by Andrew on 11.20.08 at 9.28
I take it as a great compliment for my video work to be considered bad Stan Brakhage.

Thank you.
Posted by Lief Ellis on 11.20.08 at 11.13
Wow. It sounds like this reviewer has a real axe to grind!
Posted by Craig Biondi on 11.20.08 at 15.28
You obviously didn't get it. Bill rocks and is very talented.
Posted by Katie on 11.20.08 at 17.14
Rarely do you read both SARS and masturbation in the same review; Triple Music must actually be on the edge. Great to hear that something new is going on in this age of preform/cookie-cutter music.
Posted by Raymond Bonnell on 11.20.08 at 17.29
It is one thing to review. It is another to be rude.
Posted by Angela on 11.20.08 at 19.05
I must respectfully take issue with this review on a few different levels. In full disclosure, I know Bill, Matt and Lief and I consider them friends. On the other hand, being a composer myself I know that criticism comes with the job and I have no beef with an honest, carefully composed critique.

I've read the review a number of times and I honestly think there are some flaws that should be noted.

First, I feel that Mr. Barry projected his own aesthetic biases based on what he thought the concert should have been about:

“...I was hoping for a performance that might demonstrate that electronics could be warmer and friendlier, and percussion colder and more mechanical, than how we normally think of each...”

Not to be flip but isn't that like going to a Bond film and being disappointed because it wasn't a romantic comedy? Shouldn't the review be based on the success or failure of the artist's aesthetic aims and not the reviewer's?

“...Solomon futzed with a number of "found objects”... Behind him, the projector spewed out bad Stan Brakhage imitations, while Sargent's laptop barfed up bleeps and bloops...”

The reviewer states “I do not believe for a second that any of the three musicians are hacks.” The above description implies that there is a lack of technique and understanding of their chosen medium so isn't the reviewer in fact saying that they're “hacks”? If not, is there a better way to register this displeasure without contradicting the earlier statement (and thereby losing credibility with the reader)?

And somewhat related: “...There was no nuance or rhythm, no randomness or emotion...” So, if there was no randomness, would it then be safe to say that there was a pattern, which incidentally equates to rhythm? Once again, the reviewer is saying two separate things at once.

I can't begrudge an individual's personal tastes, it's well within Mr. Barry's right to hate the concert. But if one is writing a review that is going to color the public's opinion than it's the responsibility of the reviewer to take a little more care in presenting their thoughts.
Posted by Tom Izzo on 11.21.08 at 7.27
If you consider an evening of "incredibly diverse" music to be "an ambient, loop-based bass guitarist followed by a metal band followed by a funk/classic rock hybrid," then yes, I do think that you are going to be a bit thrown by the Triple Music concert.

With all due respect, I think the writer may need to be a bit more open-minded about music like this, which you can't just compare to an existing band like Lamb of God or Galactic or Hendrix or the Black Keys or Karl Denson's Tiny Universe.
Posted by Meghan Quinn on 11.21.08 at 8.41
Make the judgement for yourself. Watch the videos of the event on Youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihV91Y-0I5k

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO-gR-d0bpo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph0NPeg85Hc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zw76lrvh4A
Posted by Lief Ellis on 11.21.08 at 19.18
I saw the clips. This is music for my grandma. Get with the times. Bravo to the reviewer for telling it like it is. John cage would turn over in his grave, if it weren't for the fact that he is bombed on shrooms beyond the pearly gates.
Posted by carl on 11.23.08 at 7.01
while i have to say that the reviewer was unusually blunt, i have to agree with him. i watched the concert on youtube and to be honest, i would have either walked out and asked for my money back or have broken out in hysterical uncontrollable laughter.

the first comment claims "edgy" and "innovative." i claim neither. you know what this music is? it's a bad rip off of 1950s avant-garde. perhaps you should go back and listen to the music of john cage, watch the cage-cunningham performances and realize that what triple music has done is nothing more than...done. and furthermore, it's been done with greater success.

i never thought i would say this, but i would rather listen to milton babbit recordings than this. at least he can claim logic.

triple music is trivial and ill-conceived. it does not take music to another level. i found myself being reminded of the many horrible undergraduate composer forum's i have attended in the past and had been trying so hard to forget.

i understand it can be difficult to accept the reality that your music is irrelevant and trite when your first instinct is to think, "whoa, we're so cool." but let me be another person to tell you (and don't worry, i have the credentials to do it), that your music is a waste of time.

i do disagree with the reviewer on one thing. he said that the performers were too overloaded in theory. i argue that there was no theory to be overloaded with at all. that they were just a bunch of kids with cool software and lots of toys, but little else.
Posted by veronica paez on 11.23.08 at 7.14
Veronica,

I have no problem with anyone disliking this performance, but honestly, comparing this improv session strictly to John Cage & Milton Babbitt? That view seems to be more stuck in the 1950s than anything else.

I make no question about your credentials (I've seen your name around Sequenza21 and other new music sites), but maybe you can use them to rise above the tired argument about every experimental performance of the last fifty years. It's become the contemporary music equivalent of the "my six year can do that" art criticism.

- Matt
Posted by matt on 11.23.08 at 17.55
Some conversation about this review has picked up on NewMusicNet: http://netnewmusic.ning.com/forum/topics/a-priceless-and-yet-truly
Posted by matt on 11.23.08 at 17.59
Leave this field empty Name*:

Email*:

URL:

Comment:

All comments must adhere to our Terms & Conditions of Use.

Find it Here:
keyword:
search type:
search in:

« Previous   |   Next »
Print Email RSS feed

'Friday Night Knitting Club' Revived
Kate Jacobs' newest revisits close-knit friends
FREETIME: Art in the American Grain
Wendell Minor’s work is a refreshing oasis in post-modern America
The Children of Tomorrow
This Modern World’s Dan Perkins creates a kids book! Yay!
3-D Photographs
Some great and some eerie portraits are up at UConn
Where New Art Is Forged
Step into the open studios at Billings Forge, Wednesdays through December
Master Class Dismissed
New Yorker’s Tad Friend recounts the fall of the American Wasp
The S-List
Author and New York Times columnist Gail Collins talks about her new book on American women, and about being a CT journalist
The Felt Life in HD
This year’s crop of best tech writing looks at here and now