In his latest concert tours Frahm performed amidst a jumble of instruments. For instance in the Spaces tour he seated himself amidst “a grand piano, upright piano, synthesisers, electric piano and tape delays.” In his current tour - Nils Frahm has lost his mind - he added “drum machines, a Mellotron (tape replay keyboard containing pre-recorded self-made sounds), his (…) Una Corda and a custom made, electronically-controlled wind organ to his new live set” (Erasedtapes, 2015). To understand Frahm’s musical practices I defined his approach as aesthetic ecology, which refers to an approach to music preoccupied with the creation of an environment with which individuals interact to create music and that gives preference to spontaneous creation over well-rehearsed performances. 


Aesthetic ecology points to a shift in the locus of artistic creation. Conventionally, music is created through predefined relations between composers, performers and instruments that produce sounds that we can variously think of as beautiful or not. The emphasis is on the performer who can show him or herself virtuoso by mastery of the instrument. What this mastery looks like is variously defined across genres. In the ecological approach, however, music is made within the context of an aesthetic environment and the locus of aesthetic creation can be situated anywhere therein. The construction of such an environment require much effort. Instruments are linked to each other, pianos available at the venues are opened up and modified, and a series of microphones have to be installed.


But this environment consists of more than only instruments, as it also includes spaces and audiences. According to Frahm, the space in which music is made partakes in artistic creation. He has for example recorded albums in his living room (Felt), or in a church (The Bells). Before writing music, he “records at a random place, as you just have to see how the piano sounds, how the rooms sounds and how it feels” and because he doesn’t “like the piano in its natural condition” he then works “on microphone positions” (Frahm in Guler, 2012). Only in the final stage he composes music for the particular set-up and its sound. The music is thus partly seen as the product of its environment. Likewise, audiences are also part of this environment and take part in the creation of music. Commencing his new tour, the record label announced that Frahm would “develop new ideas live on stage, thereby involving the audience in the process of production”, who would thus become “part of this next big creative step of developing new material on new instruments” (Erasedtapes, 2015).


By explicitly referring to spaces and audiences as taking part in creative production, Frahm’s approach seems to be inclusive. Still, there are boundaries to the environment. In the production of his music, he exclusively uses analogue or acoustic equipment:

Yeah, that’s I think the wonderful aspect of having analogue equipment because the track ‘Says’ is basically a loop but it’s a real loop – it’s not like a loop in the computer that’s exactly the same over and over again – but it’s like slightly different because the delay that’s connected to it is wobbling a little bit, it’s imperfect (Carry, 2014).


This appreciation of imperfection found in analog equipment fits the wider phenomenon of the analog-revival, referring to “a widespread desire among synthesists for a real musical instrument, something imperfect, a living-breathing entity that you can interact with and even fall in love with” (Pinch and Trocco, 2002, p.319). In the ecological approach, the idea of spontaneity takes up a prominent place. ‘Spontaneity’ has been used by independent do-it-yourself micro-labels - a cultural phenomenon in which Frahm’s label Erasedtapes can be situated as well - as a marketing tool, with which they set themselves apart from the uniformity of the music industry (Strachan, 2007). The precision of digital devices, common in mainstream music, may impair the suggestion of spontaneity and is therefore excluded from the environment. 

 

 

References


  • Carry, M. (2014). Chosen One: Nils Frahm. Fractured Air. Retrieved from: http://fracturedair.com/2014/12/09/chosen-one-nils-frahm-3/
     
  • Erasedtapes. (2015). Nils Frahm reveals stage plan of new live set up. Retrieved, May 15, 2015, from: http://www.erasedtapes.com/home/archives#
     
  • Guler, A. (2012). Princes of modern classical music: Nils Frahm and Olafur Arnalds. Unblugged. Retrieved from: http://www.unblugged.com/2012/11/24/princes-of-modern-classical-music-nils-frahm-and-olafur-arnalds/
     
  • Pinch, T. J., & Trocco, F. (2009). Analog days: The invention and impact of the Moog synthesizer. Harvard University Press.
     
  • Strachan, R. (2007). Micro-independent record labels in the UK Discourse, DIY cultural production and the music industry. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(2), 245–265.

 

Aesthetic Ecology