I really had to think about this one. Both are excellent. But as someone said earlier even improvised music is composed before hand to some degree. Even in "free" jazz, there is much less composition and a higher focus on improvisation, but nevertheless, still there is still some pre-planning involved.

Improvised music, however, has a sense of excitement and spontaneity that can never really be acheived with composed music.

I find that improvised music tends to be more interesting to listen to, where composed music tends to be more pleasing to the ears.

One of the things I like about Cage's compositions is so much is left to discretion and chance. Chance operations are composed, NOT improvised, but what's going to happen is not determined until just beforehand. It's sort of the Twilight Zone of music!

You'd be correct when discussing Free Jazz; however, total free improvisation is also a very important and common musical style and "scene" which abandons all planning.

If you want a good essay about aleatoric music and some compositional/musical dilemmas involved, there is one entitled "Alea" written by Boulez. It can be found in the "Perspectives on Contemporary Music Theory" book edited by Boretz and Cone.

Hi, by the way, I am new here.

Welcome to the forums, J.! Glad to see someone else posting in our little Avant-Garde section...

just curious... when you say chance operations aren't determined until just beforehand - do you mean in the moments prior to a performance or a few seconds before it actually occurs within the performance?

as for the main thread topic i think i prefer listening to more composed music. although when i play music i'd much rather improvise (i think)

A lot of times the performers make the determination just before the performance, but not necessarily. A lot of Cage's compositions allow for any number of performers, by any means, and/or for any length. So the performers could agree on these elements 2 minutes before the performance or two months before the performance. However, once determined, they must stick to the elements they've agreed on. If they change the elements in during the performance, they've drifted into "improvisation."

First off, sorry I still haven't gotten around to responding to your questions in the Free Improv thread. I really haven't had the time to respond properly. I have been pretty busy and didn't want to post some half ass response.


In relations to this question there are many Free Improv groups/musicians that have no discussion at all about what they are going to play. They just show up and start improvising. AMM for one, is well known for this. They don't even discuss what they played afterwards.

There is an AMM thread in which I went into a bit more detail about them.


With someone like Cecil Taylor it can go either way. These days it can be the show up and play method or for his large group recordings they can "practice" whatever hardly there "written" notation Cecil gave them. With those in the group not being to make heads of tails out what he gives them or what he wants. Just chaos as the musicians try to figure it out. Especially if they never played with him before and haven't experienced his style of "preparing". Out of that chaos his big group recordings are either masterpieces or misses. Cecil really is at his best in smaller groups or solo.


These days he is known for his classic Standards Trio, but Keith Jarrett's solo recordings are completely Free Improv. He would just sit down and and start playing.


Many of the greats cover all the spectrums from the discuss beforehand, some notation and even some practice or just show up and play without anything discussed at all.

Does that answer at least some of your question?


AMM was a major influence on Syd Barrett/Pink Floyd. They even had the same manager for a time and toured together. They were also a influence on Revolution #9.




The AMM thread.

http://www.radiomute.com/musicthread8255.html

thanks for the replies satchmo and CF

i'm basically trying to figure out where my friends and i stood in the improvisationnary spectrum... and... WE WERE FREE!!!

(at least 95% of the time )

Short answer, improv live, composition recorded.

Good improv is better than bad comp.

Good comp is better than bad improv.

In gereral I find musicians appreciate improve more because theycan relate to it more being musicians themselves.

I must say I have more studio recordings than live ones, so by default I'd have to say that compostion may rate higher. Afterall composition gave us Beethoven and Mozart. Althought the beauty of living music played live in a relational setting by improvisational bands is a beautiful thing, I think it's not as powerful as a really good composed piece.