HW: Trip Review & Inspirat

[Chris Bates]

Hi,

> This brings up my 2nd vague thought.  I don't disagree with Capt. Cloud
> about the potential for interesting stuff to come out of chaotic jams
or
> enthusiastic (drug crazed) play.  The place where I veer off is that
mastery
> is not capable of this.

There's an interesting correlation between drugs and musical ability.
Almost no-one who plays a musical instrument plays as well under
the influence as they do when *straight*. Technically it's not feasible
to think creatively, keep time, play with as much control when you're
out of it. O.K. anyone reading this who's a muso is now up in arms,
well if it was possible to perform difficult acts really well when
mentally
*unfocussed* it'd be compulsory to be drunk whilst driving...... So why
do so many people think that good music comes from the drug-experience?
Simple, no critical faculties whilst stoned so they think they've been
good when really they weren't (and it's not only music that this applies
to
..... :-).

> A lot of times people who have great technical
> skill are considered "masters", but they are not.  They stick too
closely to
> the rules and are very predictable.  A true master knows the rules well
> enough to realize when they can be broken for best effect (you should
see me
> drive).

When we learn to play we learn the rules. Even so-called self-taught,
ear-trained
musicians are learning the rules, although they might not know the
technical
terms for them. Very few people are able to learn the rules then break
them at
will - Zappa is one such person. For most musicians this is where drugs
and
alcohol come in. Not only do they mean you can overcome stage fright but
they
relax  inhibitions about what is going on musically. An associated factor
is the
state of the audience, if they're as stoned as the musicians they'll be
receptive,
if they're straight then they won't. Does anyone believe that be-bop
would have
arisen and become as popular as it did without the use of pot, smack and
alcohol amongst musicians and audiences? How many people would bother to
listen to long HW  or Grateful Dead jams or even techo without the
influence of
drugs?

Also some people need the rules to really shine - Hendrix for instance
was
way better on his first 2 albums before the debauched rock 'n' roll
lifestyle kicked in.

> I think Hawkwind has gone through all 3 phases.  The good old days
> were the jams, then they mired down a bit in the technical skill era.
> However, I think that they gotten beyond that now.  Tapes and midis
play
> their part on stage, but they just paint a basic background.  The
little
> flourishes that are added live really make things interesting much as
the
> tiny thread is what makes a tapestry.

Personally I think that the best HW has been the stuff you're calling
*technical* (it's not BTW - compared to really technical music it's about
as
simple as you can get). A lot of this stuff, I'm talking post Space
Ritual really,
is the earlier stuff played with more control and better production
values so
you can hear everything. I do agree that the sequencers etc they use now
provide the background and this puts the guitars/drums into some kind of
sympathetic focus, and it works better every year. When they first
started doing
this stuff live it was pretty dire at times :-)


Chris