What Makes for a Good Collaboration?

Primary section for noise and noise-adjacent discussion.
Post Reply
User avatar
SS1535
I Heart Noise
Posts: 487
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2022 11:38 pm
Location: SoCal USA!

What Makes for a Good Collaboration?

Post by SS1535 »

The title really says it all, what makes a collaboration in noise work?

When you collaborate with others, how does it go? What do you do? What has worked, what has not?

What collaboration albums do you think are among the best? The worst/dissapointing?

I have done online collaborations for some years now, and it took a long time in order to get into a good working rhythym with the guy that I work with---a process involving sending files back and forth many times, discussing influences, etc.
User avatar
Capers
Thrashmaster
Posts: 141
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 3:35 am

Re: What Makes for a Good Collaboration?

Post by Capers »

When I collaborate by mail/email, it's just like you say; sending files back and forth. It works well when the chemistry is good, really. Working with someone I know well who knows my preferences and my methods well. Crucial though is to not send material that is cluttered or too dense, or sort of complete as it is. There has to be room to add more and/or to tweak and process the material you're sending or receiving.

As for successful collaborations, Koji Tano/MSBR was a popular guy to turn to, and for good reason. Just listen to Yasha (with Thirdorgan), the collab LP with Speculum Fight, Cruel Science in Babylon (with Jeff Reid), the recordings he did with Blazen y Sharp... So many interesting and inventive works. And Thirdorgan, already mentioned above, is another great collaborator. Besides Yasha, the DMDN feat. Thirdorgan album Agonistes 1 & 2 is FANTASTIC. What makes each of these great is that while both collaborator's effort can be distinguished, the end result is more than the sum of its parts, so to speak.
puritanwaste
Hard Panning
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 2:50 pm

Re: What Makes for a Good Collaboration?

Post by puritanwaste »

I've got some scattered thoughts on collaboration based on personal experience.

For more improvised/in-person collaborations with time constraints, I think it helps for each player to start jamming and then gradually strip down their setup as much as possible and figure out a division of labor that plays to everyone's strengths. The more comfortable everyone is with their role/"gear", the less likely they'll be to nervously pop in and out of the mix with failed experiments as they figure out what they're doing.

I think it's also important that collaborators have the ability to set their egos aside and surrender control of everything. If one person arrives with some kind of vision and the other collaborators are willing to be guided along by it, that's great. If everyone arrives with a shared vision, that's also great. If everyone arrives determined to push their own unique vision and can't communicate or compromise, it's probably gonna be a fucking disaster.

For mail collaboration, do a phone call or something to fluidly exchange ideas beforehand and maybe develop a skeleton/establish some semblance of shared vision before getting started. Also, I think it's important that whoever kicks it off doesn't allow themselves to get too attached to the source material. If there's an element they feel strongly about that they don't want getting lost in the mix, it needs to be communicated properly right away. Don't wait until the other dude spends hours hammering away on something to let them know you're feeling particular about something in the source. That's a great way to put a complete halt to any progress and also annoy the living fuck out of your collaborator.

Anyways, sorry for my inconclusive rambling, I'm not even sure if I responded properly. I'll wrap up with a few collaborations I've been floored by as of late.

Richard Ramirez, Das Synthetische Mischgewebe – Richard Ramirez Plays Das Synthetische Mischgewebe
Really sick mail collaboration. The stylistic contrast between RR and DSM is incredibly intriguing and beautifully dynamic.

Edwige – The Inconsolable Widow Thanks All Those Who Consoled Her
I don't think I'm tellin' any tales outta school here, but the sonic alchemy between Sewer Election, Mania, and The Rita on display here is completely intoxicating. I feel like Dan Johansson is pretty much a master collaborator at this point—with projects like Edwige, Dog Holocaust (with Kakerlak), and his work with Treriksroset. I could go on forever about it.

Mike Dilloway – Hay Bale Paws
Just an awesome collaboration with lots of tape fuckery, presumably recorded live, between two greats—Mike Collino (Dog Lady) and Aaron Dilloway.
Last edited by puritanwaste on Sat Aug 12, 2023 7:34 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
holy ghost
I Heart Noise
Posts: 435
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2022 11:42 am
Location: Hamilton, ON

Re: What Makes for a Good Collaboration?

Post by holy ghost »

puritanwaste wrote: Sat Aug 12, 2023 3:42 amI think it's also important that collaborators have the ability to set their egos aside and surrender control of everything.
This is spot on - look at the collab between Anthony Braxton and Wolf Eyes. That's probably one of my favourite albums ever made. They were clearly listening to each other, paying attention to what they were doing and building off of that. If you think about a guy like Braxton being able to walk in and jam out with a group totally out of his comfort zone, and they were able to work with a guy who's straight up a fucking legend of jazz and everyone is there with a mutual respect for each other, that's a really good example of this.
Post Reply