I like to go for a certain over-the-top opulence when naming the drone pieces whereas the song titles are all about concision, I guess. I mean, if I were truly a purist, I'd call things, "Long Piece #27" or "Newest Fast Song", but I enjoy titling and it is helpful at rehearsals or when making set-lists.
The numerous ecstatic traditions - including free jazz and funk - have all been great inspirations.
However naïve it sounds, or however inept the result, I think the idea is to try to alchemize the crap, not just mirror it all.
We [Notekillers] are in no way super-earnest about what we do and if you see us live, you see we are cracking up during songs and saying pretty ridiculous things in-between. We're having fun.
Possibly the only thing we Notekillers place on a higher pedestal than music is laughs, so, of course, we also know that the idea of the title is a kind of humorous futility.
I tell people too young to know that we came up during two of the most dogmatic times in recent history - the so-called hippie era and the punk era, both of which had a set of codes and rules that you had to look and dress and think a certain way, and for sure, to be of a certain age.
We [Notekillers] aren't necessarily trying to be role models, but if we are, that's cool.
I could easily fill up each week with going to see debuts of friends' compositions alone. When you add in all of the bands I'm interested in catching and all of the improvisers that I still love, it gets almost impossibly daunting. I try to do as much as I can.
It is inspiring to see bands still trying to do significant and new things in the realm of sound. Most people in any category are more or less filling out the forms they've been handed. But there are always exceptional gems.
If you're talking about musically, I think I understand just a little bit more about things that were mostly intuited back then - how certain timings and tones work, so I can be a little more analytical about things now.
I like to give clues - titles - that can give a simple, evocative hook into what picture or feeling welled up in my mind when I came up with the song.
I do think I've learned, in the ensuing years, how to be a more effective bandleader. And maybe, just maybe, we're a little better on our instruments.
My personal definition of rock'n'roll is people attempting to do something that's beyond their ability to do it well. And whatever the outward contradictions, I do call us a rock'n'roll band.
Songs start with my bringing in the basic riffs for what you might call a verse and a chorus, an A and a B part...whatever. And sometimes a C and even a D. That's kind of the easy, or at least easier part. The hard part is finding that special, perfect way to order things - how many times to do A before B and back and how the second verse differs from the first. That's all we got.
Еach song is like starting over. Because somehow, no song's formula works for another. And that's the beauty of it all. Each song's destiny is embedded in its DNA. And our job is to reveal it.
Every improv must be song specific. It has to grow organically out of the particular elements involved or it's just glib self-expression. I hate when I feel like I'm the lead guitarist in a rock band. We all gotta be going somewhere strong together, you know?
I still have my "Anarchy in the UK" 7" [ Sex Pistols single]. I'm sure it gave us a context to think about as well as a kind of kick in the ass. But we had all been playing for years at that point.
Inevitably, as much as we loved punk rock, our noise was coming from a slightly different place.
To me, everything in the world comes down to two categories: "about-ness" and "is-ness". "About" represents or describes something, while "Is" is the thing itself.
Back in the day, I came up with the expression "Same Animal - Different Cages" to describe our songs. I suppose over the years I've just broadened the meaning of that.
