<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>newcritics - Latest Comments in A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.disqus.com/</link><description>the best in web criticism</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:42:31 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-21870313</link><description>very interesting interview, enjoyed reading it. Thanks!</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">decorativeinc</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Nov 2009 12:42:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-10781141</link><description>landscape helps musicians to think about what they will right and the concept or the topic they want to express.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">landscapersutah</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2009 22:32:01 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374677</link><description>Compositions, fair enough (though the conventional classic compositions all came from songs, or linked songs together).&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I'm still trying to figure out if they could be played by others - is there/could there be notation?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And if I get hooked on a riff and start humming it and eventually brought it into a 2:30 song - is it mine?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tom Watson</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 22:59:18 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374676</link><description>&lt;i&gt;So are they songs?&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Certainly not by the dictionary definition of the word. "Compositions," I think, is the better term. Spontaneous, communal compositions. As Andy says in the interview, the best metaphor is recorded musical conversation -- but an abstract one, using noises produced by instruments rather than words -- or of three people making a sculpture together.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Remember his considered rejection of architecture as a metaphor to describe the process of making these -- things, whatever they are. (That was why I'd planned to ask the faux-naive question, by the way -- I knew he'd reject the metaphor.) Songs have structure, balance, and symmetry, and the ornateness or simplicity of the decoration determines the emotional effect of the piece -- anything from Rococo to Bauhaus.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The compositions on Monstrance have none of these characteristics; they meander from one timbre to another spontaneously, at the common whim of the composers. This can be a recipe for self-indulgent poot at the hands of less sympathetic performers, and it's a real marvel that they've managed to pull something off that's extremely listenable and accessible.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Neddie Jingo</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:45:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374675</link><description>So are they songs?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tom Watson</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 17:26:47 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374674</link><description>Andy replies to Tom's question in an email to me:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Nah! we of course couldn't play these live. Where would we start? We could only play unheard ones live, but only one sixth of the gig would be any good.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Neddie Jingo</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 10:52:51 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374673</link><description>Great Partsy interview. Looking foward to hearing the whole album and offering my two cents. (I'm still absorbing the eight Fuzzy Warbles discs I got for Valentines Day.) Of course I would be very surprised if any type of live performance came from the Monstrance. But hell, you never know, maybe Conan? Funny how my next post also mentions Sputnik -- the real one. Small world.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ralph DeMarco</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 23:37:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374672</link><description>I listened to the Cosmonaut track - enjoyed it. Here's a question - if they only play it once, shouldn't we only listen once. Shouldn't our experience be improvised, temporary, momentary and fragile?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Actually, it would have been cool to fall into some jazz/blues progressions and then out again...</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tom Watson</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 21:15:43 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374671</link><description>&lt;i&gt;Are these Ã¢â‚¬Å“permanentÃ¢â‚¬Â songs now? Could the band play them again, take them on tour, cut different versions?&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;No more than you'd want to have exactly the same conversation you had three weeks ago, I think. It's an interesting philosophical question, isn't it: When does an improvisation stop being one?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;i&gt;Could you or I do a cover?&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I suppose you could play the same notes as you hear on the record. Another interesting question for the philosophers...&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;i&amp;gt;This seems very considered.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I get the impression that the three approached the job very determined &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt; to fall into conventional patterns like blues changes. These truly are some of the finest musicians and songwriters around, and they're good enough to know how to avoid a pitfall like that, even playing completely spontaneous music. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Did you listen to any of the samples? It's really interesting stuff. Partridge has always had a rep as being a "musician's musician," and "Monstrance" has at its core a fascinating lecture on how music is created, where it comes from in the human soul.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Neddie Jingo</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 11:57:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: A Tinny Little Sputnik</title><link>http://newcritics.com/blog1/2007/04/08/a-tinny-little-sputnik/#comment-1374670</link><description>Wow Neddie a fantastic and interesting interview - so many things to comment on. Here's one:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Are these "permanent" songs now? Could the band play them again, take them on tour, cut different versions? Do they live on? Could you or I do a cover?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;I think anyone who has a band has done this kind of thing to warm up - usually with most basic units, you all into the blues or something close and familiar. And sometimes you do this when half-loaded. This seems very considered.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tom Watson</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 09 Apr 2007 10:47:32 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>