Part 2

How do you feel your sense of identity influences your collaborations? Do you feel as though you are able to express yourself more fully in solo mode or, conversely, through the interaction with other musicians? Are you “gaining” or “sacrificing” something in a collaboration?

Thodoris: Personally, the sense of cultural and ideological identity has been one of the most important influences in my career so far. It’s connected to my idea of belonging and I think it has been crucial for the way I see art.

To elaborate on that, I like to express identity as a notion of liberation rather than a restrictive set of ideas. This notion allows you to recognise belonging and then be able to adapt, and when necessary to change. This is the way to progress and communicate with other artists, making use of our knowledge in order to adapt and change rather than being imprisoned in this “knowledge”. In this way you are not “gaining” or “sacrificing” but you are moving forward and this is what I identify with - having a revolutionary practice in art.

Regarding solo vs group, I think each occasion expresses different phases of the self, always according to the needs of the moment. I feel constant inspiration from both solo or group settings. From solo performances I have managed to observe myself in more detail, see the way I react, recognise my habits of thought.

In the group I’m able to see how I collaborate with others. The most important step for this process it’s not to read a situation as “sacrifice” or “win”, which is individualistic. Rather to see the impotence of the collective efforts which as an art practise we lead our society to coexist in a better way.

Derek Bailey defined improvising as the search for material which is endlessly transformable. Regardless of whether or not you agree with his perspective, what kind of materials have turned to be particularly transformable and stimulating for you?

We both agree and admire Derek Bailey for many different reasons. He is an endless inspiration for improvisers.

The kind of material that can transform the improviser but also the ensemble are those that come from the interaction of the moment and not from the intellectual preparation. Those kinds of materials arise when there is a moment of connection with authentic communication - which in our experience is connected with the original reason why you wanted to make art or play music.

When connecting to that moment of “the birth of sound” if you like, the controlling mind gets out of the way and then you are able to transform the material, yourself or the group. The ideas of stimulating or transformable are always related to the group and the collective notion, in our case.

This idea is explained in a wonderful way by Federico Garcia Lorca in his famous essay: “Theory and Play of the Duende”.

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?

Our approach individually but also as a group is the kind of inventing something on the spot. This way has been an endless inspiration for the group and also relates to the tradition of improvisation where we all come from.

Of course, after many years as a band growing together, we got to know each other’s ways. But instead of predicting the direction and aiming to reproduce it again, we try to use this in a way to support each individuality within the performance, rather than force a certain direction because “it felt right” in a previous gig or we liked how it sounded.

This way we feel we can progress and each player has the freedom to express themselves, according to what they are searching for.

To you, are there rules in improvisation? If so, what kind of rules are these?

Nikos: I believe that the music itself determines if there will be any rules or not, and in extension the composition, the style and the players.

For example if a composition has a very strong groove and rhythmic pattern that can be an element that will always be revisited in and out when improvising. Same if there is a strong tonic or harmonic centre and pattern.

Most importantly to me, music and in extension improvisation should always “feel good” regardless of the style.

In a live situation, decisions between creatives often work without words. How does this process work – and how does it change your performance compared to a solo performance?

As mentioned before, we are very lucky to be playing together for a long time and we all have played together in many different groups in the last years, from jazz, to folk music, free improvisation e.t.c. This experience makes communication between us much easier.

After years of making music together, you realise how important is the collective decision versus the individual need at the moment, and this is the most important lesson for the ego of a musician, we believe. We remember countless times on stage, this connected moment where you feel the whole group deviate towards one direction. These moments are very special, when the energy of the group feels very connected.

For our group, this doesn’t mean to restrict the individual needs of each improviser, but more to support the whole ensemble as a living organism.  

There are many descriptions of the ideal state of mind for being creative. What is it like for you? In which way is it different between your solo work and collaborations?

Nikos: I am pretty much following the same process for both with the exception of allowing more space for my collaborators when that’s the case. My solo work process consists of random inspiration / creative moments and jams mostly recorded in voice memos on my phone and then later revisiting the idea to further develop it.

I am a person that really needs time and space to be creative and although this is a cliche I often find myself being the most creative when dealing with personal struggles.

The same applies when collaborating with other artists with the exception that sometimes it’s just fun to just play let loose and often everything comes out naturally.

In a way, improvisations remind us of the transitory nature of life. What, do you feel, can music and improvisation express and reveal about life and death?

Thodoris: I quite like this comparison of the cycle of life and improvisation because I often feel like the journey of an improvised piece can have a lot of different encounters.

When improvisation flows freely there are these moments of connection where you can experience things as if watching them from a distance. When that happens one is able to see the material having a full cycle, the momentum of the birth, the excitement of making these sounds and then seeing them fade away as they are no longer needed.

Perhaps the “Tibetan Book of the Dead” has more answers about death and life, and hopefully some of that can be found within music.