Name: Monika Roscher
Occupation: Guitarist, composer, vocalist, bandleader at Monika Roscher Bigband
Nationality: German
Current release: Monika Roscher's Bigband will release their new album Witchy Activities And The Maple Death on May 5th 2023 via Zenna.
Recommendations: The painter Sascha Banck. I bought one of her paintings and it changed everything, it is such a difference when you have a real painting in your room! She is a wonderful artist from Fürth, she did the art for the album cover and also created the video for Firebird.  
The Rites of Spring by Stravinsky.

If you enjoyed this Monika Roscher interview and would like to know more about her music and current tour dates, visit her official website. She is also on Instagram, and Facebook.

For the thoughts of one of her collaborators, read our Matthias Lindermayr interview.



When I listen to music, I see shapes, objects and colours. What happens in your body when you're listening?

It really depends on the music! But mostly I have a more visceral reaction to the stuff I like, nothing abstract as colors or shapes. If I love it, I can feel my body being carried away and trying to connect to the sounds, trying to start a dialogue.

This can be quite brutal. I literally almost fell off my chair when I had the chance to be at the world premiere of Gorecki's 4th symphony and that huge, dissonant organ kicked in!

I recorded some incredible pieces of music when I had almost no idea what I was doing. What were your very first steps in music like - and how do you rate the gains made through experience and knowledge that followed?

My brother Ferdinand, who is playing bass in our big band, was kind of opening up the world of music for me. He is a few years older than me and he wanted to have someone play guitar in his youth bands, so he was always pushing me to do it, taking me with him to all the concerts he was going to. I was just taking it all in, listening, getting an intuitive understanding and then just trying to do it myself.

I think these formative years are still kind of the most important ones. I studied jazz guitar and composition later, and I certainly learned a lot of skills, tools and theory, which is great. But just being in the midst of it, trying stuff, navigating the unknown, that's when I made the most important experiences.

With the big band it was the same. I had no idea what I was doing in the beginning, I was learning it in real time.  

It is generally believed that we make our deepest and most incisive musical experiences between 13-16. Tell me what music meant to you at that age, please. Is music is still able to move you as strongly today?

Yes, that's very interesting! There is something magical about that age, the way we perceive the world then: with wonder, openness and excitement. And the music we are exposed to during these years kind of stays with you forever. I had my share of these musical first-love-experiences, and I still cherish them, from others I have moved on.

It might take a little more effort to find that openness but I can definitely say that music still moves me just as strongly as it did back then, maybe even more. Also, nostalgia might have to do something with it, and nostalgia is a dangerous feeling!

What, would you say, are the key ideas behind your approach to music and what motivates you to create?

There is no right or wrong, just passion. I love to experience music that I feel is coming from a place of passion and truthfulness.

Art is there to connect, to create a dialogue. It is not just about “expressing yourself”, I don't see it as self-centered as that. At the same time, you need to be true to yourself, otherwise it's a phony conversation. I love to give music time to develop, both as a creator and as a listener.

Writing my own music, there's nothing really motivating me, it's more like an urge to get this stuff out. But often, when I'm discovering new music, I sometimes feel like, hey! I've got something to say about that too! Again, it's like a conversation.

Paul Simon has been quoted as claiming that “the way that I listen to my own records is not for the chords or the lyrics - my first impression is of the overall sound.” What's your own take on that and how would you define your personal sound?

I find this to be incredibly difficult to answer. The problem starts with me being unable to listen to our records after they are out, because of having spent so much time in creating them! You nurture these songs, you watch them grow, and at some point you're just happy that they are out in the world, doing their thing.

As for our sound, I'm sure we have one, but we are 18 musicians, all with their own voices, joining forces to summon these songs - and I love my band and what they create! But I'm too much in the thick of it, I could never describe what “our sound” is. I'm happy when others try, though!:)  

Sound, song, and rhythm are all around us, from animal noises to forces of nature. What, if any, are some of the most moving experiences you've had with these non-human-made sounds? In how far would you describe them as “musical”?

I grew into a hobby ornithologist during the making of our last album. I find birds to be extremely musical and overall wonderful creatures. I love listening to their songs. I like the idea that instead of language they just have songs, instead of words they have these little themes and cues.

Obviously, there are huge differences in styles. Larks are like a symphony. Crows are like a punk concert. I love them all! The sounds of nature in general have a very soothing effect on me.

From very deep/high/loud/quiet sounds to very long/short/simple/complex compositions - are there extremes in music you feel drawn to and what response do they elicit?

In music I feel drawn to extremes in general, and to all the poles! I love brutal stuff like The Dillinger Escape Plan, I love “Black Lake” by Björk which borders on ambient music. I love hyper-complex artists like G.O.A.T. from Japan, but I also love the super simple stuff, like Soap&Skin sitting at her piano and sing over a few chords.



The only exception I would make is concerning length. Music exists in time, and I do think it needs some kind of minimum length to evolve, to have an effect, and have something to say.

From symphonies and traditional verse/chorus-songs to techno tracks and free jazz, there are myriads of ways to structure a piece of music. Which approaches work best for you – and why?

I guess they all work for me, because I don't really perceive structure in music that much. I'm more going with the flow of it, even if it is very complex music. I'm sure there's tons of symmetries, variations and cross-references in Stravinky's Rites of Spring that I'm not aware of, and I'm happy that they're there, but they are not the reason I love this piece as much as I do. At least not on a conscious level. It's not how I feel music.

As a composer I think I'm bad at adhering to stuff like that. I couldn't really compose in a certain style if I wanted to, or write a piece in sonata form, because as soon as some random idea would come up, I would want to be able to see where it leads and follow it, and then I am already gone somewhere else.

I think the complexities I'm interested in are less located at the macro / structure level, but more at the micro level, where the tensions arise in real time. I just go with the flow, and sometimes at the end, I arrive with a suite in 6 movements (Witches Brew), and sometimes it's just verse-chorus-verse – whatever fits the music best!

Science and art have both obvious overlaps and similarities. Do you conduct “experiments” as part of making music and do you make use of scientific insights for your work?

Not really. Sometimes I do experiment with certain ideas, to see if they work within the band. Sometimes I might use them, at others I discard them. But there's never anything scientific about it. I love science, but not in music.

Science is rule based, there is no freedom in it. And although there is a lot of creativity and genius involved in doing science, science itself is not created but discovered.

Music works differently, I think. It's not that all the pieces of music are already written and we are just discovering them (though, who knows?). Music really is created, out of the unique experiences and circumstances of whoever is creating it!

Do you think "objectivity", “quality”, and “truth” have a place in art or is it all a question of taste?

Objectivity: no. Quality: maybe. Truth: yes.

There is no objectivity in art, because it comes from such a deeply subjective place. There certainly are some objective aspects of art, like form, technique or skill. But that's not a fundamental part of art to me. And although I'm sure there is such a thing as quality in art, I think it's impossible to try to set up a definitive catalogue of criteria of what qualifies as good or bad art. But there's a there there!

And a lot of it probably has to do with Truth! I think it's impossible to make good art if you as an artist are not truthful to yourself and to your audience.  

By now it has been well established that visual and acoustic elements can complement each other. Do you see points of contact between hearing/listening and the other senses as well?

Interesting question. I wanted to say that maybe our sense of smell isn't evolved enough to give us as fulfilling aesthetic experiences with it. But when you think about it, our eyes and ears are not marvels of engineering either, but still, we experience most art through them, and these are life-changing experiences.

I certainly would be interested in what olfactory art might look (or smell) like and what haptic art might feel like!  

Does the way you make music reflect on the way you live your life? And vice versa, can we learn lessons about life by understanding music on a deeper level?

I'm not sure. It certainly makes me see and appreciate the beauty of the world more. Maybe it sharpens the senses for stuff like this. When others put their art out in the world, I have even more respect and admiration for it, because I know how much passion and effort is behind all of this.

But in general, I'm extremely hesitant to over-estimate the power of art in this regard. Art can be used, artists can be horrible, selfish people. You always have to seperate the art from the artist.

Do you feel as though writing or performing a piece of music is inherently different from something like making a great cup of coffee? What do you express through music that you couldn't or wouldn't in more 'mundane' tasks?

Hmm, coffee is there to use, to drink, to enjoy. Music is there ... for what? From a practical point of view, music is pretty useless. But at the same time music is such a powerful tool to see hidden meaning, hidden beauty, and to connect with people.

I know that there is music that is there just for pleasure, and I have no problem with that. I love lots of music like this! But if you never see beyond that I do think it devalues the power of music as an art form, because music can achieve so much more!

So, if I had to choose between drinking the greatest cup of coffee ever made and listening to the greatest piece of music ever made, I wouldn't hesitate for a second ...!

Every time I listen to "Albedo 0.39" by Vangelis, I choke up. But the lyrics are made up of nothing but numbers and values. Conversely, many love songs leave me cold. Can you help me understand this and why the same piece of music is capable of conjuring such vastly different responses in different listeners?

I don't know the piece, but I am sure Vangelis had something to say and was being truthful when he created it. And if you are being truthful as an artist, there will always be people out there in the world who understand what you are trying to say and they connect. It's like telepathy.

Many love songs on the other hand, aren't really love songs, they are just commodities, packaged goods. The label says “love” but the content is just snake oil. And I do think that many people really fall for that kind of stuff, and they honestly feel something when they listen to it. It's absolutely deep, emotional and real for them.

But is it real? That's where it gets really interesting.

If you could make a wish for the future – what are developments in music you would like to see and hear?

I would wish for people to flock to underground concerts and listen to real live bands who open up musical conversations. I would love to see a revival of big formations and long-form songs. That people stay open for music that doesn't follow the commandments of the Algorithm. It's the only way to change the algorithm.

The revenue model for streaming platforms needs an overhaul. And I would love to see the return of more people working in the music business who are in love with music, not just with business. Nowadays as a musician it sometimes feels like you have to do everything yourself, and the most important thing – music – gets less and less important.