Part 2

Do you feel as though there are at least elements of composition and improvisation which are entirely unique to each? Based on your own work or maybe performances or recordings by other artists, do you feel that there are results which could only have happened through one of them?

I think there are elements of improvisation that cannot be composed. I don’t think we know how to correctly write down ways to capture certain sounds of improvising. Although we are definitely progressing with all the graphic notation happening. I often think it would almost be impossible for someone to learn some of the improvisations if they were written out onto paper.

For example, in the western violin world, people think that playing something like Paganini on the violin is generally virtuostic. If someone would write down certain string improvisations that I have heard or performed, they would be on this level of virtuosic music that is widely respected.

When you're improvising, does it actually feel like you're inventing something on the spot – or are you inventively re-arranging patterns from preparations, practise or previous performances? What balance is there between forgetting and remembering in your work?

For myself, I believe in many elements to bring into improvising. Like the freedom of body movement that creates random sounds when the bow hits the violin. And then I also like to bring in something that I have practiced and it just naturally comes out even though I didn’t intend for it to happen.

And I am definitely composing on the spot. Sometimes there is a sonic sound base or drone happening and instead of joining in I might be like ... “I’m going to compose some melody lines over top of this:::: here I go!”

For me, I just do what I feel in the moment.

Are you acting out parts of your personality in your improvisations which you couldn't or wouldn't through other musical approaches? If so, which are these? What, would you say, are the key ideas behind your approach to improvisation?

Hmmm, well … I know that I have a quiet calm personality. In contrast, I would call my playing almost the opposite of this. Sometimes I think because I am calm verbally and physically, I have to get out some inner energy some other way and I do it through my playing.

I’ll be honest ... I love playing with full energy and fast flourishes.

In terms of your personal expression and the experience of performance, how does playing solo compare to group improvisations?

There are many similarities between both solos and group improvisations. But I guess when playing solo you have more freedom to go where you want and not worry about someone else not coming along for the ride or taking you for a ride somewhere else. You can choose to start and end on your terms. You can hold a note as long as you want and get into the sonic harmonics without interruptions.

But playing solo can also be challenging physically and mentally. You have to be continuously creating. You cannot take longer breaks like you can when playing with a group. You don’t have the back of your fellow peers on the bandstand to take over when the music might not be happening.

I don’t think I prefer one or the other. I definitely play with others a lot more than I do solo performances.

In your best improvisations, do you feel a strong sense of personal presence or do you (or your ego) “disappear”?

I would say a mix of both depending on the music that happened.

This doesn’t happen always, but after certain sets of music that have something really special going on, I often am exhausted both mentally and physically and have to sit in my chair for a little bit of extra time to let my mind and body energies settle back in.

In a live situation, decisions between creatives often work without words. From your experience and current projects, what does this process feel like and how does it work?

Big ears and trust are a main factor. If you know you are creating with big listeners, most likely some great music is going to be made. It is nice to be able to trust that certain players will be fine if I drop out and leave them to continue to create in the moment.

Sometimes certain players might panic and think “oh, I’m all alone now, should I keep playing? Or stop? Oh no?”

Also sometimes certain improvisations feel quite easy or comfortable. I guess that can be positive and negative. More often it is positive. After the set you feel like, wow that was easy to find my way through the music, create and trust each other.

Stewart Copeland said: “Listening is where the cool stuff comes from. And that listening thing, magically, turns all of your chops into gold.” What do you listen for?

Hmmm, well yes but if I go listen in the woods to the trees, ground, bugs, birds, etc. and the cool stuff happens, I don’t know if my chops will turn into gold. But I guess I take these nature sounds and try to interpret them into my live performances.

I am listening for the art and just life as it is being put into this world and then trying to connect with it, leave it, add to it, change it.

There can be surprising moments during improvisations – from one of the performers not playing a single note to another shaking up a quiet section with an outburst of noise. Have you been part of similar situations and how did they impact the performance from your point of view?

Yes, I think this is an important element of improvistion. If we all just copy each other and do the same all the time, I believe the music can start to get dull. (but not all the time). Part of improvising is exploring, surprising, composing, expressing energy, moods, changes, etc.

Two groups where we worked on this or at least openly talked about it are with the trio In The Sea with Tristan Honsinger and Nicolas Caloia.



The other group was another trio also with Nicolas Caloia and clarinettist Lori Freedman. I also work this element into my current string group here in Vancouver.

I have always been fascinated by the many facets of improvisation but sometimes found it hard to follow them as a listener. Do you have some recommendations for “how to listen” in this regard?

I believe seeing live improvised music is an exciting experience, which gives an audible and a visual aspect. This might be easier than to listen on a device as you get that visual part where you can see how these sounds are created. I believe one does not have to like the music but should at least experience it and see how the performers create and interact with others.

It is like a small adventure. I mean do you like all the food you eat? Do you like all the visual art you see? So for a listener, just expect you might not like everything but try it out.

I do believe you can develop an ear for improvised music or any more challenging music. One can slowly start listening to new music. Don’t just try one new album and then say, this style of music is not for me. If the listener has patience to give new music a chance I believe the ear and mind will start to understand it.

In a way, improvisations remind us of the transitory nature of life. When an improvisation ends, is it really gone, just like a cup of coffee? Or does it live on in some form?

It lives on in some form. I believe the frequencies created remain in the atmosphere and can linger for some time. This forever alters the existence of what walks through that space.

You might not remember what notes were played but the frequency waveforms are there and will affect whomever are around them.

Also, it lives on in memories.