by Tom Mulhern
Guitar Player, January 1986
Relaxation. Sensitivity. Attention. Buzzwords from psychologists?No. They're part of Robert Fripp's method of teaching guitar, in whichhe integrates elements of personal discipline in order to improve therelationship between the guitarist and the music. Few know the 39year-old English musician for his teachings; after all, he spent thegreater part of the last 16 years in King Crimson, the unswervinglyprogressive rock band that finally dissolved in 1984 (in its latestform, founded in 198, it included Adrian Belew as co-guitarist, bassist/ Stick player Tony Levin, and drummer Bill Bruford). He also hasreleased two albums with Andy Summers of the Police, I Advanced Maskedand Bewitched, and recorded and performed with David Bowie, Daryl Hall,Peter Gabriel, Blondie and the Roces. In the latter half of 1985, heworked as either a guitarist or producer with singer Toya Wilcox,pianist Elan Sicroff, and David Silvian.
Aside from his role in King Crimson, Robert Fripp is probably best knownfor his development of Frippertronics, a system in which he improviseswith himself using a pair of tape recorders, his pedalboard, and avariety of guitars. Currently, instruction takeshigh priority inFripp's life, and he is working with a new "standard" tuning for guitarthat he feels opens up an entire realm of new possibilities for theinstrument.
He is affiliated with the American Society For Continuous Education, atClaymont Court [Rte 1, Box 279, Charles Town, WV 25414], a sprawlingestate of 400 acres, complete with mansion, built in 1820. Associatedwith the Society since 1974 and actively involved in its Americanoperation since 1978, Fripp was added to the board of directors in 1982and currently serves as president. At the Society, which offers anumber of programs designed to help one acquire personal discipline, heteaches guitar in residential seminars, concentrating on fundamentalprincipals in the use of both hands, coordination, and the direction ofattention. He emphasizes how to play, rather than what to play. Healso teaches a course titles Music for Non-Musicians.
In the following interview, Robert discusses he pitfalls of the musicindustry; explains how a guitarist can gain a better relationship withmusic, attention, and physical control; and illustrates how themusician's craft can lead directly to art.
* * * *
GP -- With computers and synthesizers available to help you create music without an instrument and its technique, what attracts you to the guitar?
It depends on what one's work is. I was tone deaf and had no senseof rhythm when I began playing the guitar, and I've pondered that formany years. The answer I finally came up with was tat music so wishesto be heard that it sometimes calls n unlikely characters to give itvoice. That's one answer. Another is that working with the guitar ispart of work. And I recognize tat I simply continue to work with it.
GP--Do you view it primarily as a tool?
Yes, a tool to living. Some people make music their god. Idon't. But music is a very remarkable opportunity. It's a tangible wayof dealing with the intangible. It's a practical, down to earth way ofdeveloping a relationship with he inevitable. Now, most people involvedin music have experienced at least once what happens music comes alive.It's as if one is living or the first time. And it's almost money forjam, that by developing a relationship with music, it becomes availableto the musician all the time. When I was staying with a friend in NewYork in July 1981, I leapt from the sofa. I understood how it was thatmusic came into the life of a musician; like a friend. Always presentand always available, but never pushy, in a sense. But always there andavailable. As a working musician, as a professional musician, the way inwhich I worked changed because of that insight. Instead of rushingaround looking for other bright ideas--Robert is going to create somemusic--it would be truer to say that the music creates the musicianthan the musician creates the music. The quality of music is alwayspresent. So I work on craft. For example I continue to develop myattention to be relaxed, to be in a place where music can more freelyplay the human instrument. There is a creative impulse, and if I wereinsensitive, I wouldn't be aware of it. So, I have to develop mysensitivity. If I were tight and tense, I wouldn't be able to respondto that impulse, so I train to respond very quickly to an impulse. Andthis becomes simply the way in which one lives one's life. Can one livein a relaxed fashion with sensitivity and attention present? And, ifone can, one is on the way to being a successful carpenter or musicianor book seller or whatever. It doesn't matter what. It comes back tothe quality at which we function as a human being. A musician hashands, a head, and a heart. How do they function? How do they worktogether? The discipline of being a musician and the discipline ofbeing a human being are exactly the same. There's really nocontradiction.
GP--How does this philosophy relate to your courses at the American Society for Continuous Education, and at what level do students come in?
I'm working with two courses. One is the Guitar Craft seminars--guitar craft seemed to be the best way of putting it. But we also haveweekend seminars of music for non-musicians. First, the Guitar Craft.Originally, there was to be three five-and-a-half day seminars, butbecause of the demand, it is being expanded to eight. And there's asecond level, a fortnight course for people who've already been throughlevel I and wish to take it further. The course concentrates onrelaxation for tension and sensitivity. There are seven basic guitarexercises available to the level 1 student. We live, work and eattogether for five-and-a-half days, and the work can be intensive as thestudents can handle. The experience of the students so far has beenbetween two and twenty years. Some are studio players, and someteachers; some are professional, some aren't at all.
GP--How do you teach music for non-musicians, and who can enroll in the program?
RF -- Music for non-musicians is open to anyone who has an interest in music and coming into a relationship with it--anyone who is interested in learning how to learn, with music as a way of doing it. In other words, by applying oneself to music, one has a very direct feedback with the learning process. We work with ocarinas, recorders, percussion instruments, guitars, singing from different traditions, 15th-century songs, Congalese call and response, folk-songs, whatever. Music is a quality organized in sound. Not all of us have experience in forms of organization or producing music or singing, but we all have access to the quality of music, the spirit of music. So, how do we get in touch with that quality? We work with the same approaches--relaxation, attention, and sensitivity. Anyone can produce a sound on a percussion instrument, but if one is working with a recorder or an ocarina for the first time, one can only play intentionally. There's no room for licks. So, you have to be there--with attention. And, if you are yor state is changed from the normal and the dozy condition we wander around within. And in the heightened sensitivity and awareness, music is possible. You see, for a good player to just play licks, running on automatic, there's no music. It only seems to be music. There is what we call musical sound and organization, but there's no quality. It's only mechanical.
GP--Like a player piano.
Yeah. To me, that's not music. It may be organized sound, butunless there's that quality of music in the organized sound, it's notmusic. So, for someone who isn't a great player, who is there withattention and presence in a percussion ensemble, when they hit theirtriangle or their cymbal, then it's just possible that the quality ofmusic may be there living and breathing. Now, if that happens to appealto you, come along. You don't need chops, you just need to comealong.. And be prepared to have some fun. You don't ahev to play aninstrument, and if you do, leave it behind and se what you do whenyou're presented with an instrument you have never played before.
GP--Have any of your guitar students attended these seminars?
Some have, but in retrospect, we realize it was an error. Theguitar players should have gone on and played occarinas, and not theguitar, so that they would have the opportunity to come up with something quite new.
GP--Where does one begin teaching a discipline? Must all students know scales, chord theory, and so on?
No, not at all. One begins where one is. I generally ask for aminimum of three years of playing experience, so the musculature isdeveloped sufficiently that we have something to work with. But a lackof experience or expertise is no limitation whatsoever. However, acommitment to work is quite necessary. For people to come along andgoof off for five-and-a-half days, to have a nice holiday in thecountry, is fine, but this isn't the way to do it. So, we beginwherever we are. Now, if we are working with guitar exercises,obviously this involves the hands. So, the first thing is, "Are weaware of what it means to be alive inside our left hand?" Well, thatwould seem to be fairly obvious. But within three days, we generallyare convinced we have no relationship with our left hand whatsoever, nocontrol. So, we have to get to the point of becoming aware that we haverelationship with our left hand, and what that means. One of the mainproblems of students is tension. Anxiety. Nervousness. Stiff asboards. One can't efficiently work with one's hands until relaxed, soeach morning we begin with relaxation exercises before we havebreakfast. And then we come together generally at 8:45 for a groupexercise.
GP--Are the exercises performed on guitar?
Yes. I begin by introducing a left-hand exercise, for example.Our lack of relationship with he left hand becomes obvious fairlyquickly. For example, if the little finger keeps pointing to the sky,it's fairly obvious that we have no relationship with our littlefinger. Now since the human being is very involved and supposedly awell-integrated machine, if we change our relationship with any part ofit, everything else changes. So, for someone to come on a Guitar Craftcourse to learn guitar, it becomes apparent fairly soon that thisinvolves everything that we are as human beings.
GP--Is the left hand your first focal point because it provides immediate tactile or audible feedback?
Well, yes, the beauty of working with guitar is that one knowsexactly the extent of one's attention. If one is working with ideas ofrelaxation, attention and sensitivity in the abstract, one has perhapsvery little opportunity for direct feedback to see how long yourattention is. The are ways. For example, I tap 4 beats on my leftfoot. Now I'm beating 5 on op, and we're still having the sameconversation. And I could keep this going for a long time. This has todo with attention, and it's practised and developed. It can be doneapart from the guitar or it can be done on the guitar. Now, if I can'tdo this, I shouldn't be talking about it. So, in addition to workingwith pure guitar exercises, we work with such things as yoga,perception classes, forms of calisthenics and gestural language andbodily movement, and we have access to a number of techniques which canbe introduced if they seem applicable. We go as far as we can infive-and-a-half days. But it's generally to the point where we justbegin to be sensitive. That happens after about three days. Somethingchanges. One becomes a little sharper, for example. People hear doorsslamming and they stop slamming doors. I see the students individuallyvirtually every day, and we also work in groups and subgroups. And thestudents are presented with challenges to which they have an opportunityto respond. But nothing is compulsory. When one speaks of discipline,it can sound very weighty and very heavy. There's nothing solemn here.
GP--So, the acquisition of a discipline through these courses is not necessarily a linear progression.
Oh, no, no, no. It might seem like that, but on the inside it'snot like that at all.
GP--The original idea behind recording was to document the event, but any people now create an event specifically to fulfill the obligation of the record.
Yes. Well, there are two sides to it. One is where one isprimarily a live band and the music comes alive with an audience. Andto put that music on record requires a translation, which, if you like,is analogous to a change from an aural culture to a cryptographicculture. That's one position. The other is where the record is theinstrument--that the music is a product of the recording studio and cannever be played live. And it shouldn't be. It's purely a product ofthe recording studio. Well, that's different. Crimson was primarily alive band. The music that went on record was to eb played live.
GP--King Crimson was better suited for the stage?
It was never a good recording band, mainly because of the amount offreedom that all the musicians had--equal power of veto. And thatamount of freedom implies responsibility and personal discipline. Ifanyone wishes to cop an attitude--if egotism runs riot--theneverything breaks down. It's a situation of high hazard. More ispossible, and it can be spoiled far more easily. My own view is thatDiscipline was a remarkable album. King Crimson live in the second halfof 1981 was the best performing rock band in the world. I felt it asremarkable because of the risks. There was that amount of room wheresomething could take place, and it did. But it was also very unstable.
GP--In what respects?
If you work with hazard, the situation's not guaranteed. The pointthere is: "We're all good players. We're all good pros. We'll makethings safer. We'll put on a good performance. And that's it. It'sonly mechanical--a very wonderful, smoothly working, efficientmachine. But so what? It doesn't go beyond that. I like to work withvery god professional musicians who go beyond being professional. It'sonly a level of craft. It takes you to the point from which you leap;you're very high up and you jump. And because you're high up you mightfly a long way, or you might go straight down with a crash. You caneither play safe and that won't happen; but neither will you take offand fly. Or, you build the hazard into the situation, so things canoccur, and sometimes they might go wrong. And effectively, I tradedtwo-and-a-half awful years for one that was superb.
GP--Taking risks in music implies a certain amount of trust in the other musicians.
That's right. And willingness. It means the very best band does not reflect any of the individuals, because a band has a life of its own. It has it's own identity. The identity of King Crimson was not the identity of Bill Bruford, Tony Levin, Adrian Belew and Robert Fripp. That was quite different. King Crimson had its own identity in 1981, and afterwards increasingly became a number of individuals working together, however well. For me, that was not the point.
GP--Where does the right hand enter the picture?
That's the second prime guitar exercise. And I call the approach"the middle way." The left and the right hand are in a position ofequicourse. The left-hand thumb is behind the neck of the guitar in themiddle, and the other fingers are ready to fall between the third andfourth strings. The right hand, with the wrist in a straight line fromthe elbow, is ready at a position of rest between the third and fourthstrings. I've been developing the specific guitar exercises over aperiod of 25 years. I began playing when I was about 13. It becamevery apparent to me that there was no rigorous system for playing theplectrum guitar as there was or the piano or the violin--just a body ofarbitrary techniques. So, I began developing my own exercises, and Ihave refined them. For instance, when we put our left-hand fingers onthe strings, we generally think there are two impulses. One is to putthe fingers on the strings, to stop the strings, and the second is totake them off.
GP--More often to take them off.
Well, actually, that's an error. We should only put the fingers on the strings, and we never take the fingers off--we release them. To take the fingers off is a separate command. Here we are, ready to play on the strings:
[picture of left hand -- all fingers touching strings.]
So, we have put the fingers on the strings, and if we took them off,here's what would happen:
[picture of left hand -- fingers hovering slightly above strings, but not touching strings.]
Put them on, take them off. I suggest that is a fundamental error. Weshould release them:
[picture of left hand -- first two fingers touching strings, but now the third and fourth fingers are hovering slightly above strings, but not touching strings.]
Taking the fingers off and releasing them are two quite differentmotions. The difference is very subtle. You see, if we take them off,we apply pressure. If we release them, we complete the firstmovement; only a completion of the first. By taking them off, you'reintroducing an unnecessary command, which is highly inefficient.
GP--This is much like keeping your fingers depressed as you ascend on a string.
That's right. It's the principle of procession. The firstexercise, the exercise on the left hand, enshrines three principles.The principle of succession: when ascending, leave the fingers on. Theprinciple of release: one releases the fingers; one does not take themoff. And the principle of simultaneous release: moving from one stringto another. It's remarkable how many players take their fingers off,when all one needs to do is release them. But little fingers continueto point to the sky. As soon as students think they've got thatexercise, we put attention into the right-hand exercise. Thenimmediately, the fingers of the left hand start to spread and pointaway. After about three or four days, players who believed they had arelationship with the hands begin to get desperate, because it becomesapparent that most of us have absolutely no relationship with our handswhatsoever.
GP--Beginning pianists are often taught to do scales with both hands moving in unison, and the development of the hands seems to be fairly equal at the outset.
The exercises I use for the left hand are to develop equality amongthe fingers, and it's a systematic examination of different patterns andcombinations of fingerings. But it's not related to music.
GP--It's purely physical then.
It's calisthenic. It's a systematic examination of calisthenics--bodily grace, in other words. And part of that is, "What does it meanto be alive inside my left hand?" For example, if I put my attentionwithin my left hand, I'm aware of the blood moving within my left hand,I'm aware of the sensation of being inside my left hand. Without that,we have no relationship with it. So, it seems absurd if someone says,"Show me this exercise with the left hand." I say, "Are you aware ofwhat it means to be within your left hand?" We assume that we are. Butin fact, we're remarkably insensitive. And this has to do withattention; if I can exert my attention I can put my attention within myhands and have a relationship. But if I can't, then it's unlikely thatI'll have a relationship with my hands, so it becomes difficult tointroduce a guitar exercise. But the trick, in a sense, is that onecomes to a relationship with attention by working with the guitarexercise. It's a circular process; one works with relaxation bydirecting the attention. It is difficult to direct attention unless oneis relaxed. So the two go hand in hand. And the guitar exercises are avery good way of seeing how far our attention can stretch. Then we candivide our attention. This gets back to beating 4, and then playing 5over it, and once we can do that, maybe 7. And we can have aconversation at the same time as we do that. At that point, thingsbegin to get interesting. Very few guitarists listen to themselves oranyone else. And in a circle of 18 guitarists playing together, it's soobvious who isn't listening to anyone else.
GP--But to a certain extent, you could accuse an orchestral player of paying no attention to the other players, yet the music works.
Well, the discipline of an orchestra is a bit different. There,one is trained not to tap one's foot, and the rank and file are readingthe music. The eye is spread so that one is covering partly the musicand partly the conductor, who is the boss. In the group context, thatof the crafty guitarists--those who go through the Guitar Craft course--what we go for is an awareness of the group as a whole, not any oneperson directing the group. It's very different. The conductor is thecomposer's chief of police. An orchestra is not a group as I understandit.
GP--There's no spontaneous interaction.
That's exactly right. And within an orchestra context, I severely doubt if members of the orchestra hear each other. So it becomes critically important to follow the conductor.
GP--However, the piece can come out exactly as written by the composer.
Well, I have severe reservations about orchestral playing andorchestral music and the Western so-called classical system. Theorchestra for me is a dinosaur. I went to see the London Symphonetta inBournmouth, England, a couple of months ago, and they were quiteremarkable. But the attempts to find ways of bringing this form oforganization to life; I have major reservations.
GP--Is it because of the approach, the repertoire, or both?
Both of those and a few more. I would find it very frustrating tobe an orchestral player. There is a discipline in it, and one canrespect the discipline and so on, but how awful that the only personexpressing himself is the composer, with the conductor as the chief ofpolice and the musicians as sequencers.
GP--So, it's analogous to a MIDI sequencer controlling many synthesizers.
It would be performed more reliably, but obviously there would besomething missing. The attempts with aleatoric [randomness] principlesintroducing chance into orchestral playing, and so on, is a way ofbringing life back into it. I still have reservations with that. It'sstuck. There is a cap on how far it can go. There is a cap on what itcan do, Within the league of crafty guitarists, if we're playing incircle, the aim is not to follow any one person but to be sensitive tothe group as a whole.
GP--You want not only to be hitting the downbeats at the right time, but you also want to be reacting to the others, forming impressions.
Yes, that's right. One responds to the situation and the moment.But one can only be in the moment if one is sensitive. So, how does oneget to that point of sensitivity. They don't even listen to themselves,let alone other people. But you see, one has to be able to divide one'sattention in order to listen to other players, as well as oneself. Andit's important to have an awareness of the audience.
GP--Do you think that a certain amount of this lack of awareness can be attributed to egocentricity?
Yes, a considerable part of it.
GP--Aren't successful musicians often given an inflated view of their own worth from promoters, fans, etc.?
I think this is a hangover from the romantic tradition of the lastcentury. I'm not particularly romantic about artists. A goodpersonality, even a strong personality, is important to the performer.But it's a question of being in relationship with it. The personality,in a sense, is an organ through which we live our lives. But to attachany more importance to it than another organ is silly. For example, ifone says, "Look, here's my stomach, and I believe my stomach iseverything," then there's a limited perspective. A good personality isimportant, but one has to be in the right relationship with it. One wayof describing the personality is to say that it's the organ of digestionof experiences, to continue the analogy with the stomach. But one hasto see that one's personality is not what one is. It's an organ throughwhich I experience life. So, how can one come to see that? Years ofobservation, years of discipline.
GP--But in the meantime, musicians may be told they're #1 in the charts, everyone wants them on their records, and so forth. This positive reinforcement from external sources may be hard to cast off.
Well, it depends on how clearly one sees what one is. For example,not long after I was born--I think I was between three and six monthsold--I had a clear moment of, I suppose you'd say waking up in mybody. Here was a little Fripp baby in a pram and I saw quite clearlythat this was the animal that I inhabited. So for me there was neverany confusion: Robert Fripp is the animal I live inside. Then, in March1976, when I was in retreat in England, as I was wheeling a wheelbarrowof compost in the garden, in a flash I saw quite clearly that RobertFripp did not exist. Which is simply another way of saying that I sawthe extent of Robert Fripp. Robert Fripp consists of a collection ofimpressions and experiences over a period of years that seem to havesome coherence, but the level of coherence is very, very fragile.Nevertheless, there was "whoever I am" seeing, on two occasions--firstthis a creature I live in, and, second, this is the person that Iinhabit. I have a clear perspective. This may sound strange, but forsomeone to flatter me doesn't touch me, because it's unreal.
GP--However, conditioning through flattery and reward go on from the time you're born, acting as positive reinforcement.
What you're talking about with the kind of level of flattery and soon has to do with manipulation. And obviously, it occurs when one isyounger. I've seen many situations within the music industry wherepeople I'm working with are manipulated by drugs and flattery and allthe bit. And sadly, not everyone I've worked with is in great shape.It's a very, very difficult job. One needs to be well-earthed. Ifone's heads are in the clouds, then one's feet need to be firmly placedin the earth. When I came to live in New York in 1977, I had threerules: ride on public transportation, do my own laundry, and do my owngrocery shopping.
GP--To keep a firm grip on reality.
Yeah. There would be few people in a laundromat in New York, or ina grocery store or on the subway to entertain anyone's brightaspirations of personal conceits. You know exactly where you stand.You're told very quickly. I found that useful. I'm nervous about one'slife becoming distant by limousines and first class ravel.
GP--At the opposite extreme, sometimes there are people in the same band who have everything done for them, and they travel separately, live separately, and never see each other except onstage and in the studio.
The answer is they're not in the same band. They're in differentworlds. There's only the form that seems to be together. But, whybother, if people loathe each other? And, obviously, anyone that oneworks with, perhaps, irritates one a little. But like and dislike arefairly cheap; I don't concern myself too much with that. If one canrespect the person one's working with, and the music is good, then onecan put up with quite a lot. But, if the music isn't nourishing, thenlife becomes difficult.
GP--Once the student has come to grips with his out-of-controlness with the left and right hands, what next?
After the first basic left-hand exercise--the principles ofsuccession, release, and simultaneous release--and the right-handsystem of alternate picking, we then look in more detail o developingthe left and the right hand. For example, with the right hand we moveon to cross-picking. And I'm using a new standard tuning for the guitarto replace the E A D G B E. I'm not quite prepared to go public on it--very close to going public. It's a new standard tuning. However, it'snot an altered tuning.
GP--It's not fourths all the way across, or anything like that?
No, it's different, and I would say it's better than the old standard tuning. Infinitely better. So far 91 guitar students have worked with it, and I have adopted it and work with it all the time myself. If flew by while I was in a sauna in September 1983. Then I went down to Campaign-Urbana, Illinois, to work with Adrian Belew, and I tried it there, but I didn't develop it: I didn't work with it seriously until March 198. So, the guitar students came along, and we put on the new standard tuning. This way everyone is beginning at the same point, whether they've had two years or twenty years of experience. It means one cannot run on automatic.
GP--You can't fall back on old stock licks.
RF -- That's right, you have to play intentionally. Now, we would be remarkable--if we could be with that amount of intention all the time.
GP--Wouldn't a new tuning each week help to maintain that level of concentration?
Yes.
GP--Couldn't it also reach a point of muddling you?
Yes, that as well. The point of this new standard tuning is thatit's an infinitely better standard tuning than the old one, in terms ofchords and single notes. It's a more rational system, and it soundsbetter. But the practical effect within the Guitar Craft course is tateveryone is at the same point and they have to play intentionally. Ihave heard of some players that alter their tunings regularly in orderto keep themselves fresh. I believe that is a valid approach. AdrianBelew has a new system of his own [Ed. Note: On some songs, Belew uses EA D A B E, low to high: for more on his tuning, se Jan '84 GuitarPlayer.] But it's not an organized standard tuning system quite like theone I'm using.
GP--After playing in the widely used tuning for many years, how far can you divorce yourself from your original concepts?
That depends on how much work you're going to put into it. Yousee, if one puts attention into what one's doing, the effect is toinvest an awful lot now for the future. The older one gets, tenprobably the greater effort one has to make. But I find that it'sbecoming difficult to go back to the old standard tuning--and I've beenplaying with the old standard tuning for over 27 years. If one putsattention in, then tat means one's putting in a lot of high-gradeenergy, and an awful lot can be done.
GP--To induce a guitarist to abandon is old system for a new one, there would have to be many superior attributes to the new system. Does your new system facilitate new intervals or harmonies that aren't readily available in standard tuning.
Yes, that's part of it. It's more effective. It's a more rationalsystem, but it's also better sounding--better for chords, better forsingle notes.
GP--It doesn't use a 31 note per octave fret scheme or anything exotic like that?
No.
GP--So, you still use the standard 12-tone equal temperament. [Ed. Note: Equal temperament is our modern system in which all half-tones are equal, and therefore al intervals except the octave are slightly out of tune. This allows music to be performed in any key with complete freedom.]
Yes. Well, I mean, the guitar isn't in equal temperament. Supposedly, it is, but it's not at all. The intonation varies up anddown the fingerboard. Someone with a sensitive ear could not possiblyplay a minor third on the first fret. Couldn't do it. It torments myears. I can't bear intervals on the first fret, by and large. If oneis using, for example, the old standard tuning. If it's going to be anE-major, with G# on the third string, first fret, and E on the bottom, Ican't bear the sound of it. It's so off. In the old standard tuning,what I would always do is take the G# on the fifth string [eleventhfret]. That's how I would handle it. Or I would take it at the sixthfret on the fourth string, with the E in the bass. As I moved up thefingerboard, the intonation changed such that my ear could accommodateit. For my own tuning, I use perfect intervals in fourths, fifths andoctaves. I think every player finds his own way on guitar. Theywouldn't necessarily call it Pythagorean temperament or just temperamentor equal temperament. It's just some ears can't bear, for example,major thirds. I find it very difficult to listen to major thirds, byand large.
GP--Is it easier to listen, say, to a minor third?
Sure, minor thirds or perfect intervals. And I can't bearequal-tempered pianos; they sound quite wrong to me. In fact, inEngland it was only after 1850 hat organ players began to build organseffectively with equal temperament. Many of the forms of musicalorganization are made possible by equal temperament, although anorchestra doesn't play in equal temperament. The only instrument thatprobably does is piano.
GP--Fretless string instruments such as cello and string bass allow you to compensate.
Yes. Stravinsky used sharps and flats to designate differentpitches, realizing that although the notes may be enharmonic inpractice, if you write in a flat, it's going to be flatter than if youwrite in the enharmonic sharp note. [Ed. Note: In standard notation,enharmonically equivalent notes are two names for the same pitch; e.g.,C-sharp equals D-flat, etc.] With a sharp, you're going to pitchslightly over, while with a flat, you're going to pitch slightly under. So if you wanted a descending string line to be a bit sharper, theninstead of writing the notes down as flats, you write them going down insharps.
GP--In acquiring facility with your new tuning, does one simply discard their former repertoire?
Yes. It's a wonderful opportunity to begin again. If you want torewrite or reposition your former work, fine. One of the guitarstudents set himself to work with the old tuning and the new one, and torelearn all his licks, runs, and patterns. He's also working on a chordencyclopedia for the new standard tuning. That's wonderful; anything hewants to keep he can, he can keep, and anything he wants to drop, he candrop completely.
GP--But, as you become comfortable with the new tuning, doesn't one the risk of falling back on stock patterns all over again?
Yes, certainly. There is always a tendency to work at the lowestlevel of intensity that the situation will permit. We call itlaziness. So, the question is: "How can one remain alive?" Well, thereare two prime techniques. One is shock--working with shocks. And theother is to work with challenges. For example, let's deal with shock. The sound of the electric fan over there is particularly irritating, butinstead of thinking, "Oh, boy, that's irritating," and become cross andangry, I can use hat as an opportunity to keep me awake when I'manswering these questions, rather than nodding off into a nice routineinterview. But within a short time we'll both be used to that sound andwe won't hear it anymore. So, one can work with shocks in the shortterm, although it's limited. The other technique is to organize achallenge beyond that which we can comfortably reach. So, for me it'staking on more guitar students than I can handle, because there's no wayI could deal with that number of guitar students and work on automatic. Once you can do a guitar seminar with too many students, then do twoback-to-back. And then once you can do two Crafty Guitar coursesback-to-back with too many students, put a seminar in the middle: aweekend of music for non-musicians. There's always a challenge one canset to take oneself the coasting level.
GP--Do you plan to print any of your concepts?
Yes, I'm writing them up and will be going public with them fairlyshortly. At Claymont, the different ideas and talks given in the guitarseminars will be published in the Guitar Craft monograph series. Iwould think in early 1986. The course is very, very practical; it's notparticularly theoretical, and level 1 doesn't talk about music theory,for example. It focuses purely on the discipline of producing a sound,the music as a quality of organized sound. Rather than moving ontosyntax and semantics, we begin with sonology--how to produce a sound--and what's involved in coming into a relationship with the hands. Theforms of organization of music, I think, will be part of the level 2. We examine many things. What is the implication of basing a form ofmusic on asymmetry, rather than symmetrical principles? Or, what's theimplication of building a formal structure on the golden mean [ageometrical proportion] and Fibonacci progressions [a series based on headdition of 1 and 1, followed by a succession of numbers that are thesum of the two preceding numbers], rather than on traditional formalsymmetry of the Western classical tradition? Again, what would theimplication of working on 5 rather than 4 beats be?
GP--You wouldn't get much pop radio play.
Well, that's probably true.
GP--In the context of rock and roll, for example, everything revolves around 4.
Well, there's 4 (taps 4 with one hand while tapping 5 with theother). It's not being denied; it's still there. It's a fundamentalpulse.
GP--Don't people generally want a strong primary pulse, rather than an implied or subjugated beat? After al, such a firm 4/4 beat is all around them, on the radio, TV recordsÖ
Well, it's very difficult to speak on behalf of what people want.
GP--It maybe more of what they're used to.
Yes, well, pulse is fundamental. (Holding index finger to hiswrist.) There we are. Everything comes back to our. It's fundamentaltime. Then you have a time signature, which might be 5/8, which is aform of organizing the pulse. And there's tempo, the speed at which thefundamental pulse is moving. Then you have timing, which interrupts andstresses certain discontinuities in order to express meaning. So,fundamental pulse--for me--comes from the body. Time signature, theorganization of time, is help by the mind. Formal structures and timingare generally the heart--to know exactly the right moment to stress amild discontinuity.
GP--It would largely be up to musicians to open up people's minds to complex syncopation or meters such as 13/8, 5/4, and so on. However, such non-dance-oriented irregularities can make it hard for a musician to et gigs, a record contract, airplay, or other means of making a living.
To answer a question like that at a Guitar Craft course, I'd referback to a diagram of the music system which we would discuss on thefirst evening. To begin with, there's music, and then, if you like, wehave the musician. And what is involved in the musician developing arelationship with music? Well, there are comes a period of time whenone has to introduce the third element of the audience, to bring therelationship to life. So, the musician begins to develop a relationshipwith music and take that relationship further. He has to play in frontof people for a good reason. One needs the energy of the audience. Ifone wishes to take one's relationship with music further than that, youhave to introduce a fourth element, which is the music industry. So,you have these four elements: music, the musician, the audience, and theindustry. No, how can I put this quickly? Any three-term system worksin sic different ways. If you introduce a fourth term--the industry--you have four triads, or three-term systems; so the are 24 differenttriadic qualities present in a four-term system.
GP--In other words the life of the professional musician is a lot more complicated than the life of the amateur musician?
Yes. Now if one goes into this with one's eyes open, you can plot what is involved in being a professional musician. When I came to New York, I set myself quite deliberately to develop a relationship with the record industry--to see from their point of view. Part of the professional musician's craft involves developing a relationship with the music, the audience, and the music industry. There are constraints and opportunities because of that. But once again, it's only on the level of craft, in the same way that one develops one's vocabulary as a musician so that one has resources at one's disposal. Because you know what it means to play in the Mixolydian scale doesn't mean that you're going to be any good. It means you're going to be able to play the Mixolydian scale. The craft of the professional musician, as opposed to the craft of the amateur musician, is more complex. But it's still craft. And there are opportunities and limitations as part of it--within that. The point is that one has to rise above craft, and the quality of music, I suppose we say, now becomes available to the artist.
GP--There seem to be so many pitfalls for the potential artist when they reach the music industry after years of musical training.
Well, the training for the musician isn't necessarily the trainingof the performer. Nevertheless, the professional has to learnperformance, and so does the amateur. At a certain level, craft becomesan art. So, purely by hard work, one can become an artist. It's aremarkable thing. We still have these romantic notions of the artistbeing some select god-like individual with direct contact with themuses. A few do, but it's not like tat for most of us. By hard work,we can put ourselves in a position where we have a direct relationshipwith the quality of music. For me, art is the capacity to re-experienceone's innocence; in other words, to simply be who you are. Now, thereare a number of different ways of becoming who you are. One doesn'tnecessarily have to go the route of music, but music and guitar give youvery direct information on, for example, your attention span,sensitivity and so on. And one can discover the person one is byworking on the discipline of being a musician. If one works at asufficient intensity, one's personal state changes. And at the point atwhich our state changes, art is available. It took me a long time tosee how real that is. Hard work is never enough. Well, it's not, but itis. By working hard enough, at a certain point, the way in which oneworks changes. And that's` the point at which hard work is irrelevant,in a sense. But you need the hard work to get you there. So, I simplysay that one can't approach art directly. And at the point at whichcraft becomes an art, the quality of music is there waiting.
GP--Craft multiplies your means of expression.
That's part of the offshoot of it. But that's not, for me, theprime thing. By working on the craft side of things, one's personalstate changes. And at that point, it's not a question of expressingoneself. One is whoever one is.
GP--How did you convince he record companies to release something that falls as far outside the mainstream asI Advance Masked with Andy Summers?
Well, there's the commercial side of it. I divide he music industry into three divisions. The first is the area with mass and popular culture; he second is where one is a craftsman who can earn an honorable living; and the third area is the area of research and development, arts and crafts and so on. And each of the divisions has its own divisions. I would say the I Advanced Masked album was a matter of research and development and arts and crafts, and of professional musicians working honorably. If you make an album for $5,000 and sell 100,000 copies, then it's commercially feasible. If you made the same album for $150,000, it would be a disaster. But if you work in a good garage studio, with two musicians playing together--then it needn't be an expensive item. And because of that, you can release it. You don't have to undertake hugely expensive promotional campaigns. It's good work and it will find its own level. I think it's absurd, for example, that you spend $350,000 to make an album and then $250,000 to make the video o the single. That's absurd. At that level, you have to sell 750,000 copies before you beak even. That's madness.
That's an awfully big gamble for a group. It puts a lot ofpressure onto the music, which the music might not be able to handle onits own level. To come back to what we were talking about earlier,regarding he craft of the professional musician, the economic of theproposition we just discussed are stupid. It's bad craftsmanship.
GP--However, many musicians are not particularly strong in areas of economics, management, and other business aspects--especially on a world-class scale.
There it's up to a manager. You see, if a band is very successful,and they don't get on, then one way of dealing with the successful band,getting the records out even though they loathe each other, is to hire arecording studio that has three studios for 24 hours a day for threemonths. The drummer will do the drumming, and then send it to the nextstudio where the bass player will put on the bass part, and so on. Soeverything is remote. Well, what happens is the album is very expensive.Because it's expensive and the band don't really like each other--it'snot a group--generally, he album stinks. So, ten you have to launchheavy campaigns to get it off, and you spend a fortune on the video. Well, the whole thing becomes arbitrary. This is not how I wish to livemy life.
GP--With King Crimson, did you have more money and/or time than with Andy Summers?
Yes, the budget was higher; the time spent was more. With only Andy and myself, we'd sit down and lay anything at all for a week and record it on a running tape. And after a week of having thrown out ideas, we'd assess the ideas and develop and rehearse hose which particularly struck us. With Crimson, my feeling is that one should take the material on the road first, and then record. So you write the material, rehearse t, take it on the road, and then come in and record it. Which was how we worked with Discipline. It was recorded and mixed and done completely in three weeks. So, it was a very cheap album. The other two albums [Beat andThree of a Perfect Pair] were different. They were more expensive, they were harder to make, and the material, by and large, was not played live prior to recording--which, in my view, is a considerable error. But my opinion--contrary to a lot of popular belief--was only one among four, and generally one against three. The way I envisioned the group was probably true for the first year with this group, 1981, but not for the rest. So the other albums were more expensive and, in my view, not nearly as good.
You believe that you should work out the feel of the music in advance.
That's exactly right. How can you get a feel otherwise? If you take the music on the road, the music goes into the body. So, when you get into the studio, your attention is not only on purely producing the notes. Your attention is available for the quality of music and the interaction between the musicians. If you're simply learning music and playing in a studio, it hasn't gotten to that point. In other words, the music isn't breathing; the music hasn't come alive on its on.
By working in a small studio, where you aren't paying hundreds of dollars per hour, do you feel that you have a lot more freedom or less pressure to produce.
It depends on the artist. Some need that particular tension to make them work. I'm what's called a self-starter. I don't need, if you like, arbitrary tension to make me work. The demand of the music is sufficient for em. I work better knowing that the record isn't costing a fortune, because if it costs a quarter of a million, then the record company will expect--I think reasonably--that you're going to support the record. So that means you must go out and do the interviews, tour and all the rest of it. And this puts a certain strain on the music, which the music may not bear. So, if I go to Arny's Shack and make a very good album for $10,000, it only sell 10,000 copes. It might sell more. Thanks purely the economics of it. The point is, I can make a record I wish to make on its own terms. It'll rise to the level to which it rises.
Why did you choose the lineup of King Crimson?
RF -- I wanted the best performing live rock band in the world. Iwanted the first division. I wanted the best. I was just coming out ofThe League Of Gentlemen, which was a wonderful little bopping and, butit was unprofessional.
It had a very loose feel.
Yes - which was fine. Except I don't like going on-stage with people that are drinking beer. It simply takes the edge off. I want to go on-stage with the commitment to play--not to drink beer and play, for example. I wanted higher standards. So I called the best. The intention was not to reform King Crimson. We had the band together, and while driving to rehearsal, I became aware that the identity of King Crimson was available to these musicians. Simply that. We worked in Europe under the name of Discipline, but it became fairly apparent that we were King Crimson, so we accepted the name.
You even had a band with two full-time guitarists. Why this one?
Well, I suppose the quick answer is that it was the right combination. It couldn't have been any two guitarists. Adrian was the man. To say that Adrian Belew is a guitarist us kind of not quite putting it right. To say that Bill Bruford is a drummer isn't quite putting it right. To say Tony Levin's a bass player isn't quite putting it right. That was the grouping of people, and I had specific musical ideas. A particular kind of spirit of the music was quite real for me, and at the same time, I couldn't really tell people what to play. But you find by working with musicians that there are different ways of techniques for coming up with the forms of organizing sound. For instance, if you concentrate very closely on a particular idea in an intense and sensitive atmosphere working with another musician, then within a fairly short period of time--it might be days, it might be a week, it might be a month--the other musician begins to play the idea you've been concentrating on. Now, there's no way to say, "Good if I'd shown you that you would have not played it, but now you've come up with it and you believe it's your own," so you simply say, "That's wonderful, great." And there are other psychological techniques -- to put oneself in the place of other musicians, and so on. But if you work together as a group, you develop a group mind. You're all plugged into each other, and something emerges. I had a very clear sense of what the band should sound like. And in 1981, the band sounded like that, although at the same time it was a product of everyone. But I was emanating how the band should sound, so that no words had to be said. After that, the other guys had ideas of hat they wanted in the band, and for me it went off course, frankly because it became a group of individuals, rather than a band.
When one person goes off to do a solo album, do you feel he is running out on the band or weakening it?
I think it's wonderful; I have no objection with that. What I object to is the person trying to make a group's record his solo project, so that an individual's music purports to be the group's music. For example, a Robert Fripp solo album should be a Robert Fripp solo album, not Robert Fripp doing his solo in King Crimson. So, King Crimson's policy was always to encourage all its musicians to work with others as much as possible. The more you can be with someone else, the more you can be with yourself. There's no differentiation. I think it only enables one to grow. And if one has a bee in one's bonnet--on the pure and practical level--about a particular sound idea, then best to do it on your own, rather than impose it on the group.