Talk:Free improvisation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 moved from Free music 2 Brotherhood of Breath & Sisterhood of Spit 3 Signifigance 4 Joel Garten 5 reentry from guy's deletion 6 Subgroup 7 References

[edit] moved from Free music

I've moved this from free music - see Talk:Free music for one of the reasons. I also think that "free improvisation" is the more common term. The two might seem to mean different things, but as far as I know, free music is improvised by definition anyway, so there shouldn't be a problem (somebody else may know better of course). --Camembert

[edit] Brotherhood of Breath & Sisterhood of Spit

Restored Brotherhood of Breath & Sisterhood of Spit- these were actual bands with strong free improv influences, and were not put in as 'spurious' or 'self serving' references. quercus robur 22:00, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Signifigance

Copied from 65.3.169.133 's talk page;

Re Free improvisation on exactly who's authority do you decide who is 'insignificant' or 'self serving'? All the musicians & performers listed exist or existed, to delete groups such as Brotherhood of Breath (who featured Louis Moholo, Chris McGregor, Evan Parker, and recorded the seminal live at Willisau album or Iskra 1903 (who were Barry Guy, Derek Bailey and Paul Rutherford, and released at one album on the Duetsche Gramaphone label, and I believe, at least one other) as 'inisigificant' shows breathtaking ignorance of the free improv scene and it's history. quercus robur 19:00, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Joel Garten

I deleted Joel Garten from the paragraph detailing relatively well-known free improvisers. I know free improv is fairly marginal stuff, but consider these figures: Garten has no allmusic.com listing, and scores about 20 google hits, verses about 7,600 hits for Keith Rowe, 62,000 hits for Derek Bailey, 17,000 hits for Peter Brotzmann, or 56,000 for Evan Parker, who all have extensive discographies and reviews on all music. Anon, 10 Dec, 2004

[edit] reentry from guy's deletion

my passage on the minneapolis free improvisation scene was deleted by guy hutton. i believe it is important to provide information on this scene as it is vital to the progress of free improvisation. if listing several musicians in the minneapolis scene is viewed as "shameless self promotion" then i think you have the wrong idea about wikipedia. this is a resource for the dissemination of information, not an eliteist organization. there are several free streams of free improvisation on the record label insides music which was included in my post. the passage right above it is about the london radio station and wnur of chicago which has far less free improvisation than insides music. if you're going to delete insides music for the reasons of self promotion, then you should also delete those passages that have less relevance. i have re-added the names of some notable performers here in minneapolis, but left out the record label note about where people could go on the internet to listen for free. what are thoughts from others? should i put on the passage about insides music? here's what i readded: "Minneapolis has a vibrant free improvisation scene. Notable free improvisers of Minneapolis are: Milo Fine, Davu Seru, Jaron Childs, Bryce Beverlin II, Charles Gillett, Nathan Phillips, Tim Glenn, Mike Hallenbeck, Jt Bates, Edward Schneider, Casey Deming, and the group Brown Rainbow."

And you are Bryce Beverlin II, that is the problem. Welcome to Wikipedia, but please don't lecture others until you've a) learnt how to sign your talk page contributions (see my welcome notice on your talk page for that) and b) understand that Wikipedia is not a place for random facts or self promotion (see - and I hate linking to these rules and rarely do it - WP:NOT). --kingboyk 02:46, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

and you are kingboyk. just because i am posting something that has to do with me doesn't mean it is self promotion. and i will lecture you on free improvisation if you need it. this article is horribly bare and elitist. the minneapolis scene has a lot to offer for free improvisation. why would you discourage information on a specific place where free improvisation is vibrant? how are people to be represented if we don't start somewhere? and you have no business putting a negative welcome note on my page to tell someone to delete it and the 7 hour film i've been working on for over 5 years and the record label i started that has a quality world culture contribution and following. kingboyk, please don't "hate" . wikipedia is not for hate. and wikipedia IS for random facts as well. just go to the homepage. each day something is drawn at random to INFORM!!! that's what this site is for: INFORMATION! and communication of ideas, events, and works to those who may not otherwise be exposed to them. so a) please be understanding of someone you don't know b)sorry i didn't sign my talk page contribution. i forgot that step. i think it was pretty obvious from the "history" page if anyone had any doubts. would it be acceptable if i wrote that the minneapolis free improvisation scene was very active, but left myself out of the listing even though i am a major contributer? i'm a bit frustrated with whom this article has chosen to represent free improvisational music. it is the music of right now. so those who are making it right now should be represented. and now for the four tildes. bryce Bryce Beverlin II 16:47, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Really, there's a point to not including a lengthy discussion of the Minneapolis free-improv scene as part of the main article on "free improvisation". For one thing, it greatly overstates the importance of the Minneapolis scene (not that it isn't a fine scene and all) to have it appear as its own section without those of myriad other cities listed as well. Secondly, the article would become incredbily long, unwieldly, and just plain ugly if it contained a long list of every obscure free improv scene the world over (Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Wellington, New Zealand; Madison, Wisconsin, etc, etc.) or an exhaustive list of free improv players, etc. Any or all of these things could be included in another page with a less broad scope. For example, you could create a page called "Minneapolis Free Improvisation Scene" or (better) "Free Improvisation in Minneapolis, Minnesota", where such content would be perfectly appropriate, and we could link to it off of this page. (Maybe with a link to a category of "local free improvisation scenes" or whatever). Voila. Problem solved. (Of course, whether or not the article should be written by someone mentioning themselvesin the article is at odds with the whole "self promotion" thing is a whole different issue.) Ellen Smithee 16:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subgroup

Personally i know nothing about the minneapolis free improv scene, but Wikipedia would be thge ideal place to learn about it, and be a reference for futrure historians, hence have re-instated the contentious text within a subgroup in a way that I personally think would facilitate this. Hope this helps. quercus robur 20:59, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] References

Morning, y'all. I've done a bit of a tidy up on the article and converted the inline external links to a new References section (as per WP:ECITE). Having done so, I felt it was OK to remove the 'unreferenced' tag. Toodle pip. Alchemagenta (talk) 02:04, 4 April 2008 (UTC)