In February and April 2022, my research colleague Robert Seaback invited me for two recording sessions in the studio of the Academy of Music. Initially we both were eager to collaborate. After a period of isolation during the pandemic, human interaction was very welcome. For me, the simple act of transporting my drums to another part of the building for a recording was a relief and inspiration in itself. I also was very curious about getting to know Robert and his music. My sole experience of his work was at the Academy in autumn 2021, where he presented his in-progress works in ambisonics. What struck me most in this concert was Robert’s awareness of dynamics and his poetic use of field recordings, whose thoughtful placement and layering resulted in a sense of depth that left an impact on me.

Listening back to the first session, I think it is evident that we both were on separate planets, dealing with our own materials and processes. I found myself not being very attentive to either what Robert was doing or the totality, and rather continuing in my own world in search for meaningful music on my own instrument. 

I wasn’t sure what to expect of this session. Robert hadn't told me much. I wasn't sure what instruments he was planning on playing, or even if he was going to play along with me (or only process my sounds in real time). Since Robert was a new acquaintance, I decided to use the opportunity to offer a sound palette that I had been exploring in my own project—to share something, and to possibly discover other angles into my research and hopefully vice versa. I like first sessions with a new collaborator, which can be awkward and enriching at the same time. I must admit I had my doubts when we started, observing Robert’s back while I was starting to play. I remember thinking; Is he going to be with his back towards me the whole time? And yes, he was, but I quickly got accustomed to it without any discussion. I accepted this premise as a point of departure, and I actually felt relieved, because I didn’t need to have eye contact with Robert, nor he with me. In my practice, I prefer not to have visual contact with my collaborator. There are no scores to look at, and the music is invisible; the most substantial and informative interactions occur through listening. Mostly I find visual contact to be disturbing for the musical discourse. I think looking weakens the ability to listen, and it puts the emphasis on gestural communication, which to me is a largely superficial way of creating musical connections. Robert, with his back towards me, was making a clear statement (conscious or not) that our work was going to be about listening. 

We hadn’t discussed previously how we were going to interact within these sessions. I had a notion that the musical discourse would be dependent on my initiatives and impulses, and that the communication would be sort of unidirectional, with Robert’s contribution mainly in the area of electronic processing relying on my sound production for his sonic contribution. In this way, I would encounter my sound as interpreted by Rob’s process. Robert and I reflected on our process later on, and I got the feeling that Robert had a desire to play and interact more with his own material. My own feelings about his desire were ambiguous. I can accept just about everything in a session as long as the participants are comfortable and agree upon the premises that are set from the outset of a collaboration. Yet I can see that a constant monodirectional musical discourse can be arduous after some time and yield predictable constructions of sound and form. We didn’t want to be predictable, so I for sure needed to open up my ears and give space to Robert’s initiatives.

Having Robert manipulating my sounds in real time using the software programs Max and SuperCollider gave me an opportunity to observe my material from new angles, especially via his electronic processing of my performance. I wondered if the two of us could achieve similar results playing live with an ambisonics configuration. I decided to invite Robert to collaborate in a concert in my series. As material, he chose to use what he had recorded and manipulated from my sounds during our workshops and live processing.

the skin is vibrating
the drum is vibrating
the room is vibrating
my body is vibrating
the objects on the skin are vibrating
the orchestra of vibration

The concert

I knew that it would be challenging to suddenly find myself in the middle of Levinsalen, surrounded by Robert's amplification of my own instrument coming from eight speakers and two subwoofers facing the center of the room. During the soundcheck, though I realized, to my embarrassment, that I hadn’t thought about how my performance would need to change if I were amplified. Until now, I had been playing without amplification in my concerts, apart from part V, which was a special experiment. We had also never played together with this degree of amplification in our previous meetings, let alone in a hall like Levinsalen. Now, with Robert’s electronics and my manipulated sounds coming from everywhere, I found myself completely overshadowed. It was obvious that I needed to be amplified in the PA system in order for us to balance our levels.

Nevertheless, despite these challenges, I came to enjoy our performance a lot. We were both throwing ourselves into deep water, researching our parallel paths in real time, awkwardly pursuing some kind of symbiosis between our different approaches and desires. I was trying to get my head around how to relate to the amplification of my acoustic sound while listening to my processed sounds, sometimes with a significant latency, in surround sound. I can’t remember if Robert presented any sounds that didn’t come from my playing. He probably had enough on his plate just processing my sounds. In the end, I think we had incompatible interests from the very start of this performance. Musically, we would have benefited from having several sessions in the same space with the same kind of amplification. We would have had time to discuss the challenges we faced and make smoother logistical and aesthetic decisions. It was hard for me to create a musical discourse this evening, even though I can appreciate the music listening back to it.

Playing with amplification is usually a challenge for me, as it clouds the way I listen and play. If I can and the conditions allows it, I usually prefer to play acoustically. From projects that include my collaboration with Robert, I have learned that I need to decide whether to use amplification or not before initiating a project.  Amplifying sound through a PA takes the project into a field of listening and performance that I need to further investigate. Having now tried out two amplified versions (The Vibrating Drum V and The Vibrating Drum VI), I want to take a step back and return to the acoustic approach, where I feel more in control.