introductory statements

my work can be naively summarized in to these main things
​

• interest in the main modes of interaction (solo, unison, compliment, juxtaposition, and silence) 

• interest in an ever changing non defined music 

• interest in a completely unrestricted performance, where all participating don't feel limited during the set

• interest in developing a solo language to help improve my practice in group settings 

​

my method of releasing can naively be summarized into these things

​

• to document all ideas that i may have on a instrument or in a DAW

​

• to document all meetings i may have with musicians who consent to a release 

​

• to document whether i subjectively oppose to whether something is good or bad to my own tastes 

​

• to make recordings accessible on more than one platform so that is easy to access to everyone

​

to me the best way to achieve these things is through the process known as free music. the definition of the term is quite literal in the sense that it means i am free to do what i want. 

improvisation, while seeing a rise in popularity, is seeing a decline in authenticity. there is a lack of awareness of ones true identity for the sake of making a living. while i sympathize with anyones hustle, this has ultimately had effects on the music. much like most things today it is becoming academic and aestheticized. i have very little interest in helping with this transition and instead look to honor its radical past in subversions of forms, hierarchies, and conventionality. 

musics indoctrination into forms of academic hierarchy have signaled an end to musical traditions. this means the complete subordination of the tradition into a homogenized form used by current standards of class.
we can look to the radical art form of jazz as a current example of this.
what was once an art form purposing new ideas, and forms that questions pre existing notions of rhythm and harmony, is now a stale interpretation of what came before it. again we see an emphasis on nostalgia rather than an emphasis of the original tradition (creativity and originality).
when musical traditions are taught in an institutional setting we are lead to a  disposable way of looking at music. music is then viewed as something to produce capital rather than something to subvert capital and its function.
it is not looked upon as a study of yourself but instead looked at as a tool to receive grants, attention, and other bi-products of entertainment.

historically, music that is radical has developed through authentic community relationships. relationships that encourage individuality as well as communally shared ideas. these ideas are new and unlike things that have happened before it, while still drawing upon past methodologies. institutions are not that. they are a stale mate in creating new ideas, they are the regurgitation of the past.

this music is about change
this music is not about stagnation 

the motivation to make a static and not continuously progressing music is not one i share. to me music is a process of discovery. 

to discover, there must be no leaning into one aspect of sound for too long, to be prepared and ready to move onto something else. this could mean quite literally in performance to more generally in ones releases. 
 

"ethics are the aesthetics of the future" 

with my work i look to challenge on a level that is both accessible and eye opening. art should not function as something that is exclusive but something that rather pushes someone to look beyond their held view of things.

"everything that embellishes life is constructive" 

though it is easy to read it this way, music is not a metaphor. its content should be taken at face value: form and function. however, ones methodology and practice is useful to producing new outlooks. in other words, do not take what i say/do as a novel but rather as a documentation

everything i do is to document, including this writing

"It is necessary to confront vague ideas with clear images"

those who aren't entirely invested in the work of free music and improvisation, those who peer on the outside and admire it as an exotic thing as opposed to a historical statement, look to mimic the dedication that others have put into it.
rather than study and critique the way they themselves and others might play, they instead view it as an aesthetic to co opt and use on their own front.
this should be called upon as ((BULLSHIT)).
when i talk about inauthenticity this is what i am referring too. today we are image obsessed, and instead of criticism and leading to our own conclusions, we instead; either feel nostalgia for past work, or a yearning of what is hip in the moment.
there is a hunger of coolness that outdoes the search of self reflection and critique of work in general. what this leads to is a musician base not focused on the work itself but rather how the work makes themselves look, feel and focuses on a "deepness" of emotion which is in fact void in the content they are making.
it is maybe not just in free music where this is a problem, but it is a fact that improvisation has become a resumé item as opposed to a process of learning and creating.

to define radical music  - 

fundamentally DIY 
new sounds, forms, ideas 
fundamentally non institutional 


examples 
blues
rock and roll (and extensions) 
jazz (and most extensions) 
reggae, dub 
early edm
hip hop

other influences -

punk, house music, existentialism, comedy, metal, hip hop, my mother, my grandmother, my dad, a catholic upbringing, nihilism, coffee, sampling, plunderphonics, jean luc godard, anthony braxton, ornette coleman, cecil taylor, derek bailey, barry guy, yamantaka eye, joe morris, grant beale, michael larocca, luke rovinsky, and many others.