Visions Of Excess
Interview by Alessandro Ludovico (www.neural.it)
1.
How much important is now the visual part of a sonic work? I mean the booklet graphics, the video, the live set, are they really a unsplittable part of a sonic work, or everything could be reduced to a computer file, listened with the eyes closed?
V.O.E.: Of course the music comes first - the project is developed from there. But that doesn't mean visuals are just an add on. In the development process there is a lot of talk using visual terms to describe structures. That could also said about time (the dimensional entity). Doing music like we do takes place in a dense world of synesthetic perception. This is what we try to strengthen too for the listener. If the visual work of V.O.E. can support this, then we achieved our goal. So visuals are an integral part but it's the music where everything is developed from and should work 'freestanding'.
2.
What's your own definition of soundtrack?
V.O.E.: If it is meant strictly as film music then we don't think music should follow film like a slave just to support what is already there.
That's plain stupid. Music should more work as an additional force that adds another dimension. Music can work in itself as a soundtrack if synesthesia works and triggers mental images in the mind of the listener. But there is no code or language to achieve this, it is the moment of intuition where the myriads of agents in the brain of the artist interweave a new soundscape that hopefully helps to grab a moment of seeing thru the mud of pre-history.
3.
Do you think there's any unlistened sound inside a microchip when it's carrying electric signals?
V.O.E.: In a physical sense: no. There are no air molecules moved. But it would be possible to amplify these signals and use them to move a speaker membran. Surely not usable as a synthesis, too determined.
4.
Magnetic fields, interface routines and imposed gestures. Daily all these things impose psychological and physical abitudes. How much these abitudes condition your sound work? In the future how do you like to interface with your machines?
V.O.E.: Everything is welcome and can be added to the arsenal. But there is nothing wrong with a traditional fader. Incorporating gestures is an old technique (e.g. Theremin) but too coarse for a lot of structural development. We don't want to chase every fashionable controller the industry throws at us. Networking different techniques and ways of developing sounds and music is our way.
5.
Do you share the same visions of 'technology's excesses'?
V.O.E.: Yes, we don't see technology as a threat. Excesses are repeated chances to cross the boundaries of barbarian times. Only reactionary minds would see a problem in excessive use of technology. What for us is all day use of technology means for others maybe an 'excessive' use.
6.
Paul comes from the seminal Clock DVA band. How much important was that experience for you, and what's the most important thing about sounds and technology you learned in that time period?
Paul Browse: After our initial demise in 1983, technological developments in music were one of the driving forces behind our reunion. Technology opened the door to a new universe in which it was possible to indulge the constructive and destructive sides of our nature to the full.
7.
What's your sonic relationship with the fascinating theories of Robert Anton Wilson and how is gone your collaboration with him for this album?
When Robert Anton Wilson was invited to the studio for a private interview the intention was to create a relaxed atmosphere whereby anecdotes concerning the human condition could be exchanged. It was not a lecture/performance on the part of Mr. Wilson and therefore theoretical speculations were not called for. The views expressed were born out of personal experience. The material which we decided to use was that in which his opinions coincided with our own and where the sonic quality of his voice was complementary to the music.
Back to MINUS HABENS RECORDS home page