I listen to music every day. Intentionally. I choose something to set my internal harmonic brainscape and listen. It was a difficult and startling revelation to me back in my youth to realize many people don’t. That is, even when they have music playing, they don’t listen. For many, it’s wallpaper, and this just struck me as sad.
But it explained what I thought of then as the execrable taste a lot of my acquaintances seemed to display in music. I have never cared for so-called Top 40 tunes, with rare exception, because in my experience such songs were either the least interesting pieces on their respective albums or they were the zenith of a mediocre musical imagination. Boring. Listen to them three or four times and their content is exhausted.
I also used to have an absolutely absurd prejudice that if I could manage to play it myself, on guitar or keyboard, with only a few practices, it was just too insignificant. This was ridiculous, but I’d been raised to appreciate technical difficulty as a sign of quality in most things. It took a long time for me to overcome this notion and I still have not completely.
For good or ill, though, it informs my taste to this day, and in the presence of the technically superb I am seduced. I have found technically accomplished work that was simply not as good as its polish, but I have more rarely ever found sloppy work that was so much better than its presentation that it didn’t matter. Technical ability, precision of execution, polish…these are not simply ancillary qualities. The guitarist may know all the notes of the Bach piece but if the timing is wrong, the chording inaccurate, the strings squeak constantly, it will be a thoroughly unenjoyable performance. Likewise, if the guitarist has composed a beautiful new piece but then can’t perform it as imagined…who will ever know how beautiful it is?
Ultimately, technical sloppiness gets in the way of the work. The better the technique, the clearer the art shows through.
Which brings me to what I wanted to talk about here.
The other day I sat down with two works that for whatever reason seemed to counterpoint each other. Put it down to my peculiar æsthetic, as I doubt anyone else would consider them complimentary. And perhaps they aren’t, but they shared a common quality, the one I’ve been going on about—technical superiority.
Ansel Adams is a byword for precision in art, especially photographic art. His images are studies in excellence, from their composition to their presentation. There is a fine-tuned carefulness in many of them, if not all, that has set the standard for decades. I have a number of his monographs on my shelf and I have been an admirer and follower since I was a boy. His set of instructional books, the Basic Photo series, were among the first I read when becoming a photographer myself. Every year I hang a new Ansel Adams calendar in my office. I have a biography of him, one signed volume of his Yosemite images, and I find myself constantly drawn to his work. These photographs are replenishing.
So when a new collection came out this past year—400 Photographs—it was a given that I would acquire it. (I do not have all his books—there’s a heavy rotation of repeats strewn throughout his œvre.) I had it for some weeks before I found time to sit down and really go through it. When I did I was surprised.
The collection is broken down in periods, beginning with some of his earliest images made when he was a boy, reprinted directly from the scrapbooks in which they were pasted, all the way up to the very early 1970s when he, according to the commentary, stopped making “important” photographs and devoted his time to the darkroom. Gathered are most if not all his iconic images, many that will be familiar to those who have more than a passing acquaintance with his work…
…but also a number of relatively unknown photographs, peppered throughout, many of which show a less than absolute control on Adams’ part. They do not come up to par. Some of them, the composition is slightly “off” or the tonal range is not fully captured.
Which is not to say they are not beautiful. Adams at his worst is equal to most others at their best. But historically it’s interesting and instructive to see the “not quites” and the “almost theres” among the otherwise perfect works we have all come to expect. But rather than detract, these works actually enhance the overall impact of the collection, because there is variation, there is evidence of “better”, there is obvious progression. The commentary between the periods by Andrea Stillman is concise, spare, and informative as to the distinctions in evidence. This is a chronicle of an artist’s evolution.
Looking at an Ansel Adams photograph, one sometimes feels that the very air was different around him, that light passed from landscape to film plane through a more pristine medium, that nature itself stood still for a few moments longer so the image could be recorded with absolute fidelity in a way given to no other photographer.
As I went through the images, I listened to a new album. New to me, at least, and in fact it was released this past year. Levin Minnemann Rudess.
Of the three, two had been known to me before this year. Tony Levin is a bassist of extraordinary range and ability. Besides his own work, he seemed for a time the player the serious groups called in when their regular bassist was unavailable. Which means he played bass for Pink Floyd in the wake of Roger Waters’ exit. He played bass for Yes. Dire Straits, Alice Cooper, Warren Zevon, and even Paul Simon and Buddy Rich.
He was also one of the most prominent members of King Crimson during one of its best periods. He is a session player in constant demand and his ability seems chameleonic. He can play anything in almost any style. He is one of those musicians who always works, is always in demand.
Given his associations, sometimes it is a surprise to hear his own work, which can either be described as a distillation of all his influences or as a complete departure from them. Such would seem to be the case here.
Jordan Rudess plays keyboards and came out of the progressive schools of Keith Emerson, Rick Wakeman, UK, and others, although the first band with which he was associated was the Dixie Dregs. He later joined Dream Theater, but like Levin has been a much in demand session player whose name I’ve seen pop up many times since the early 90s.
Marco Minnemann, then, is the only name with which I am unfamiliar, but that’s changing. As a drummer, he’s played with former members of UK—Eddie Jobson and Terry Bozzio—and has been doing session work with metal groups. I learned of him just this past year in association with guitarist Guthrie Govan, with whom he has formed a trio with bassist Bryan Beller, The Aristocrats. He seems committed to that unit, so I believe the album I’m discussing may be a one-off, an experiment for these three musicians. He is an explosively complex, solid drummer.
What does this have to do with Ansel Adams?
Not much other than what I began with—precision. There is an overwhelming technical precision here that, for the duration of my study of the Adams book, formed a complimentary experience of sharp-edged landscapes and absolute control. The LMR album is largely instrumental (which has slotted it into my writing queue) but fits no particular genre exactly. Jazz? Sure. Metal? Somewhat. Fusion, certainly, but fusion of what? Rudess’s runs evoke classical associations, but no single track is identifiable with a particular Great Composer. This is experimental work, theory-in-practice, done at a high level of musicianship and compositional daring. An aural high-wire act that is constructing the landscape as it records it.
As I said earlier, it happens more often than not that technical prowess can substitute for significant content. “Too many notes” can mask as absence of substance. Too-fine a presentation can distract from the fact that an image contains nothing worthwhile.
But when substance and technique are combined at a stratospheric level of ability, when performance melds precision and depth, then we have something truly special.
All I needed that afternoon was a fine wine to complete the immersive experience.
2 thoughts on “Mixed Signals”
I’m so pleased that you have discovered govan and minneman. check out the last steven wilson album, as they comprise the meat of the band. Exceptional. Better than their trio project, really, because of the emphasis on composition over technical expertise, but all the expertise is still there.
After acquiring an electric guitar this year, I went surfing the net for instructional videos and stumbled on Govan. Amazing! I have both Aristocrats albums now. What really tickled me was finding out he’d played for Asia (!) I will hye meself over to find the Steve Wilson discs you recommend. Thank you.