Reflections on first rehearsal

JE and CV in conversation immediately after sight reading play through (not verbatim):

SWOT analysis

1. Strengths
1.1 On the whole nice environment (score and instrumentation) to work with. Balance of logic (distribution of source materials) felt good and initiative.

1.2 cv: did je object to the RVW reference elements within the CJA score [a previous conversation had questioned the purpose, validity and cultural issues of employing such 'referencing' techniques]? je: difficult to know what to do; tried to avoid literal interpretation as it could "go pitchy"

1.3 cv: did je find he was dovetailing sections for smooth transitions? 50:50

1.4 cv: did je perceive to be 'inside' the reality of the text? je: combination of improvising in response to the piece and proactive 'ev2' style engagement.

2. Weaknesses
2.1 je: too short ... felt the desire to be involved in music passages (combination's of the quartet) that were longer than possible with the current software logic. Music takes a while to establish, develop ideas and explore the score. Spoken text, however, is much quicker and more immediate.

2.2 cv: biggest problem was using the clean mic creatively.

3. Opportunities
3.1 The walkie-talkie was a useful tool for musicians, not used to using their raw voices in performance

3.2 je: if the piece was longer, say a couple of hours with longer durations for event, it would be possible to explore the act of improvising rather than improvising with the soundworlds. Q: is cv precious about improv opportunities?

4. Threats
4.1 je: does the audience perceive our efforts? Do they link the performance and resulting composition with its intention? Why not play them something from the new ev2 album and call that the CJA?

4.2 je: why a computer and not CD's on random shuffle?


5. AFTER listening back to a recording of first run
5.1 je: felt better to play than to listen back to it. Not I enjoyed the playing because of the computer generated visual score ... should the audience see this too?

5.2 cv: it feels like the performance does not embody the wholeness of the report, but more an Ariadne thread like exploration through it.

5.3 cv: sounds like there is more improvising to the sounds and not improvising to create the theatre from within the report

6. SECOND RUN THROUGH
6.1 je: will explore literal interpretations of RVW score.