Talk:No Wave

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Punk music, an attempt to improve articles related to Punk rock. Please participate by visiting the project page for more details on the projects.

Contents 1 Current no wave 2 Film 3 No wave? 4 Ghostyard 5 List of Artists

[edit] Current no wave

What about modern forms of no wave? Bands like Blonde Redhead, Deerhoof, Numbers, Tamion 12 Inch, would they be considered current versions of no wave? Some info on current music/bands should be added maybe. - Milk 08:35, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I think it would make more sense to talk about contemporary bands influenced by No Wave. If there was any post-1980 band that sounded anything at all like the original No Wave bands it was God Is My Co-Pilot, who denied repeatedly that what they were doing was No Wave.

Rosquet 23:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ok I admit im not that popular with the offshoot, but as far as I understand it at least the term is much newer than implied in this article. I never even heard the term until the mid 80's and I swear it only became really popular a few years back when new wave influenced stuff was the hip scene. --69.58.167.121 20:01, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Fortunately Wikipedia relies less on individuals lack of knowledge and more on sources such as AMG ([1]). The No New York compilation was released in 1978, how much earlier do you need? Hyacinth 22:12, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

The reason that it doesn't discuss modern no wave is because there's no such thing. It was pretty much dead by 1983. The musicians live on in other bands, the influences are still heard, but the genre is over. Call them whatevere you want, except for no wave.

[edit] Film

The other thing that needs to be in this article is no wave film, such as the work by Amos Poe- like "The Foreigner".

I'm not at all sure no wave film should be mentioned here. I mean, yes they share a similar name, time/place, and John Lurie, but were they really that related? Can anyone who is knowledgable confirm or deny? - Bert 171.159.64.10 00:10, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Lydia Lunch toured as a speaker with a travelling exhibition with what I think were No Wave films. The exhibition was organised by the Whitney Museum which has No Wave films in it's collection.

There was a record called Beth B and Scott B's Vortex which had Lurie and Lunch and Adele Bertei. One track was the theme from Black Box. They created a kind of B Grade suspense soundtrack with samples from a No Wave film.

Also "Lucy Hamilton" was one of the members of MARS and she did the film soundtrack "The Drowning Of Lucy Hamilton" with Lydia Lunch.

The magazine Art News had a feature article on the No Wave scene around 1980. The RE-Search series of books and the magazine Forced Exposure were switched onto No Wave. Try looking up Kristian Hoffman (Tad Among) on the net, he played with James White and the Blacks. Barnaby Walsh 09:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC).

[edit] No wave?

I'm frankly puzzled by the listing of certain bands as "No Wave" (inasmuch that such categories may be useful or not), Material (band) in particular (also not sure why it was piped to the top of Category:No Wave). Suicide (band) precedes both punk rock and no wave by several years (1971, IIRC without going and fetching an old cassette); I have seen them lumped in with punk but never no wave. No wave was also very specific to New York City in the late 1970s; The New Rolling Stone Encyclopedia suggests "by the Eighties, no wave was dying, and in fact it seemed to have its short lifespan built in from its inception." -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Someone had added ESG and Liquid Liquid following an earlier removal, and I have removed them again. I can't imagine anyone describing those two bands the way that AMG describes No Wave, "harsh, abrasive, and aggressively confrontational." I think perhaps that some editors are equating No Wave with downtown NYC bands that weren't explicity punk. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:33, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You'd better read the sources you cite before you start quoting them. AMG says that ESG wasn't No Wave by design, but the sound was. They also cite ESG as influencing other No Wave bands. Harsh and abrasive "Moody", confrontational "Erase You". If it walks and quacks like a duck what is it? No wave! --spiderleggreen

You're right, I didn't read the ESG entry at AMG, just the one for No Wave. However, one could make the same claims about Ornette Coleman (recalling what I'd read in Lester Bangs' Psychotic Reactions), but I wouldn't list him under No Wave, either. I could see listing either of them under "Influences", or some such. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 19:48, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

The reasons that ESG and Liquid Liquid could both be considered No Wave is obviosuly because they fall into that 78-82 downtown New York category, both were on 99 Records which was known for hosting other no wave musicians, and also...their sounds. No Wave doesn't have to be abrasive and confrontational, that's just one particular brand of no wave. Would you call Lizzy Mercier Descloux abrasive and confrontational? And what about "Queen of Siam" by Lydia Lunch, that's a very important no wave record that I wouldn't consider abrasive or confrontational. The point is that ESG and Liquid Liquid made up the dancier part of the scene that no wave revolved around. I guess that it could be argued that ESG were not no wave because they lacked any type of punk influence, which I consider a preqrequisite, even though other no wave musicians said they hated punk (but let's be honest, it was influenced by punk). But that would be nitpicking against ESG. As for Material, they made up the whole nu-funk/jazz part of no wave. It almost seemed like a separate branch. Musicians like Bill Laswell, Fred Frisell, Michael Beinhorn, Fred Maher et. al. had these incestuous bands that more or less made the same music under different names. It wasn't the greatest no wave, but Material did have some good songs. Suicide I feel could also be considered no wave. Again, to say that they shouldn't be considered as such is nitpicking due to the fact that they preceded the generally considered time constraints of no wave. They were super-creative, had a completely different sound, were a performance art act, avant-garde. They were signed to ZE records. They were on the NY No Wave compilation. They played with bands like The Contortions. "If it walks and quacks like a duck, what is it? No wave!" —the preceding comment is by 128.205.167.6 - 14:08, 20 March 2006: Please sign your posts!

By this rationale the term No Wave becomes a useless umbrella, as it would seem to include any musicians working in downtown New York who weren't explicitly punk rock. Why not throw in Lou Reed, John Cale, Talking Heads, or Ornette Coleman? If there is no particular No Wave sound then the "quacks like a duck" analogy is pretty hard to apply. Either "No Wave" describes a specific style of music, or it refers to the entire NYC scene that was peripheral to punk rock. I've always read that it was the former, but if it's the latter then it would be very hard to decide whi isn't No Wave. Looking at it from another way, given the danceable aspect of some of these bands, would you add them to the Disco article? (I wouldn't.) They produced dance music in Manhattan during the late 1970s, and if it quacks like a duck... -- Gyrofrog (talk) 15:23, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Of course there is no specific sound to no wave. However there are multiple sounds to no wave. They blend free jazz, punk, modern classical, dance, and noise. Every band that I consider no wave blends those sounds together. That's the first aspect. The second aspect is that it must fit in the new york 78-82 (roughly) category. But ALSO must be part of the SCENE. That's waht it was. A scene of bands that played together. ESG, Liquid Liquid, Suicide, and Material didn't necessarily play together, but played at the same venues (Max's, Kitchen et. al.) and had the same friends, and played with the more obvious no wavers (DNA, Contortions). Since it's sometimes difficult to distinguish who was really friends and who played shows together, it's sometimes more simple to just go by the general guidelines that underground new york from that time period could be considered no wave. So Ornette? No...he revolutionized free jazz, but didn't really experiment with other styles of music. Velvet Underground...completely predated no wave. Although I have seen interviews (ugh, no source, sorry) that said Cale was close with the NYC underground from that period. Talking Heads...too damn popular, not experimental enough. So I concede a little bit. No wave isn't soundless, it's more of an omnisound.--128.205.167.6 22:29, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh and one more thing. No. I wouldn't add Liquid Liquid and ESG to the disco article. There's a difference between disco and dance music.--128.205.167.6 22:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

In response to User 128.205.167.6 & spiderleggreen: I have to largely agree and partially disagree with Gyrofrog. It makes no objective sense to include dance and pre/post punk bands like ESG, Liquid Liquid, the Bush Tetras, Suicide, or even later no-wave artist's music, like 8-eyed spy, and post-Contortions James Chance, in the list of no-wave bands. Much of this music was contemporary both in time and place, and occassionally "no-wave" bands shared members with non no-wave new york bands, but to present this as criterion for a no-wave band is ridiculous. Robert Smith played with Siouxie and copied her makeup - does this therefore cause the Banshees to also be an overtly melodic pop group with a penchant for windchimes? The arguments for inclusion of the new york dance bands as no-wave seem to center on little more than association, which is equally silly. I'm sure I don't need to explain how sharing a label does not necessarily predict or define anything about the bands on that label. I personally don't think queen of siam was VERY important as a no-wave record, any more than I see Daydream Nation, or the Ascention, as one.

You know, the Birthday Party were around from 78-82, Lydia Lunch performed with them, and they were certainly "harsh, abrasive, and aggressively confrontational." Why should they be discluded simply becuase they're not from New York? FOR THE SAME REASON THE BEASTIE BOYS, ESG, AND SUICIDE SHOULD BE. I personally don't buy falling back on AMG any more than I do falling back on Pitchfork for a definitive account. How about someone like Richard Edson, drummer in both Konk (a NYC dance band of the time, in a vein similar to Liquid Liquid and ESG) and the earliest incarnation of Sonic Youth, a band pretty easily included as no-wave for the earlier work. He writes the following in the liner notes of the 1981 self titled, 2006 re-issued Sonic Youth EP: "Konk, which was started before Sonic Youth. . . was a funky-groovelectric-Afro-Latin dance and party band like our brother and sister bands - Liquid Liquid, ESG, Kid Creole and the Coconuts, and Material in New York . . . Now Konk was certainly not hip-hop or go-go, though we were, I liked to think, drawing on similar rhythmic and party-oriented ideas that had nothing to do with Sonic Youth.

"Of course there is no specific sound to no wave." Then why try to categorize it as a genre? No wave, a genre that is only a genre by categorical hindsight (like film noir) was isolated, short lived, "small," and necessarily very specific. Look at the bands on no new york and others like theoretical girls and early sonic youth - while there's variation in style and background for sure, I think it'd be difficult to claim those bands did not sound specifically similar in a number of important ways - ways bands like suicide, bush tetras, and esg certainly did not sound. Gyrofrog raised clearly relevant points about ornettee and the velvets that were equally clearly not understood - by turning the definition into one of association and not of specific criteria, you eliminate any real referential relevance or potency the definition may have held. Please don't confused "no-wave" with "good" as seems to be happening - all of the bands we're talking about are fantastic, but easily and definably not the same.

"If it walks and quacks like a duck what is it?" The answer? Not necessarily a duck! The funny thing about this phrase is it contains within its logic the site of its own refusal, contradiction, paradox, etc. What I mean by this is that if the phrase actually meant what it is supposed to, it would say "If it is a duck, it is a duck;" instead, it's a classic MacGuffin/object petit a. So, obviously, I don't buy that argument. I'm removing ESG, Liquid Liquid, Suicide, Bush Tetras, 8-Eyed Spy, and James White and the Blacks. A lot of the others I either know nothing about, or are debatable, so I won't touch them - I suggest a separate "See Also" category where a lot of the bands we're talking about might be sorted and linked. Maybe this is something we can agree on?

And finally: "There's a difference between disco and dance music." Please re-read that, and think about it for a little while.-- Chris

quite frankly, your argument is so scattered i don't know where to begin. I have thought about my phrase, and i stand by it. Just because you can dance to it doesn't make it disco. Tell me if you would call Average White Band, The Fire Engines, and Fatboy Slim disco. Three completely different genres, all with goals to make people dance, none of which could really be categorized as disco. I wanna say that you make many valid arguments from what i could understand, so I'm not just trying to be argumentative here. I think a lot of it boils down to difference in opinion. You wouldn't call Queen of Siam an important no wave record, where as I would. YOu would call Daydream Nation an important no wave record, wheras I wouldn't even classify it as no wave. I think we need to take what is communaly agreed upon as no wave. First off, I refuse to believe that no wave is anything outside of New York. You misspoke when you said that no wave is a categorical hindsight. I believe it was Lydia (correct me if I'm wrong) that coined the phrase back in 78 in the Voice. The record was called No New York for a reason. No wave was most definately a scene, and not one that reached beyond NYC. People seem to think that any kind of artsy punk from the late 70s is no wave. But there is clearly some kind of difference. Second, I COMPLETELY agree taht we shouldnt go by AMG's standards. They're close, but not perfect on a lot of genres, but their mistakes are often enough with no wave to disregard them. Third, this whole "abrasive and confrontational" thing came out of nowhere. I stand by my original argument that Lizzy Mercier Descloux is really neither but I strongly consider her no wave. My concession is that I could see why many would disagree about ESG and Material, so kick them. Suicide I could also see, but I really feel strongly about them as being a no wave band. Bush Tetras were so imbedded in teh no wave scene that they should stay. Pat Place was clearly a fixture in film and sound in new york no wave as was producer don christensen. and 8 eyed spy I feel very strongly about as no wave. as i conceded before that no wave doesnt necessarily not have a sound (rather an omnisound), 8es had the jazz, punk, noise, and dance influences strong enough to classify them as such. Liquid Liquid had punk influence, noise roots (see Liquid Idiot), clear dance roots and were good friends with all those no wavers. James White and the Blacks were a no wave band. there should be no argument about that...Off White was made witht eh same band as The Contortions who were on No New York. As for your Konk reference, I didn't understand where you were going with that. Your Souxsie/Cure analogy was understood, but lame at best. 209.222.250.42 05:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

See, I think a lot of the things you said I have said myself, but I draw different conclusions from. Of course if you can dance to something it isn't necessarily disco - this is why the 'walks like a duck' bit makes no sense (if it's danceable and shares similar traits to disco, it doesn't mean it's disco). What i meant was disco IS dance music (you separated the two), but dance music is not ONLY disco. Anyway, after thinking about it, i do think the bush tetras might belong. Sonically it's iffy, but MAYBE it's enough for me not to argue it now. Further, i said Daydream Nation is specifically NOT a no wave record - you're right, it's absolutely not no wave music, in the same way that 8 eyed spy's stuff or queen of siam aren't. Same artist, different style. I agree that people seem to think a lot of post punk (or pre-punk, in suicide's case) is no wave, which is why i wrote something to begin with, as i felt that's what was happening here in particular. but suicide was A) earlier, B) metered, and C) largely consonant (if not melodic!), so it's difficult for me to see how they qualify. The "abrasive" quote came from another user above. I was responding to how silly that was as a criteria. The Edson quote about konk illustrates that someone in both a (then) no-wave band and a disco-punk band saw very clearly no similiarities between his dance band (and other dance bands he names as 'bretheren'), and music that sonic youth was making. I don't think james white and the blacks are no wave... it's clearly different music, it's described as more "disco" in the liner notes of the box set, and the whole point of different incarnations was to make different music, as far as i can tell. making different music with the same poeple (liquid liquid vs. liquid idiot, james white and the blacks vs. the contortions) still means you're specifically making different music! categorically not no wave! There are lots of things influenced by jazz, punk, noise, and dance music (like most shoegaze), but that obviously doesn't make it no wave. And of COURSE the siouxie/cure example was lame... that was the idea... the point it illustrated was lame! --- Chris

It seems that we're straying from the point of the discussion section and attacking/defending our beliefs, which is ultimately pointless. We've agreed that Bush Tetras are no wave. Suicide, James White and the Blacks, and 8 Eyed Spy seem to be up in the air. Perhaps there should be a list of "loosely considered no wave bands". yes yes? although, it would be hypocritical to have a quote from RIUASA calling Suicide a no wave band, only to shun them. --209.222.245.244 19:59, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ghostyard

Can someone tell me who Ghostyard is? I've never heard of them, and I doubt their no wave status. Also, just a question of curiosity, who did Tomek Laprecht play for?--128.205.167.6 15:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I've never heard of them either, allmusic.com has nothing by that name, and a google search for "ghostyard music" just turns up this page. I'm guessing either VERY obscure, or someone just added their own band. I've removed pending any verification of existence. 171.159.64.10 01:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I've removed it again, pending verification and/or establishment of notability. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:16, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The editor who added "Ghostyard" contacted me privately (I requested that he discuss the issue here). I don't think the issue is whether the band existed, but whether the band is sufficiently notable to be listed as a proponent of No Wave. In the editor's own words, the band was "obscure," so I am not sure that listing Ghostyard helps any readers who know nothing about No Wave. He did provide a URL about the band, from which sound samples are available: http://www.frankdunn.net/music.html -- Gyrofrog (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Artists

Amusing. Looks like I was doubly correct on Ghostyard - both extremely obscure AND added by former member. But I think there's a bigger issue. The artist list is currently a total mess, and needs to be reworked, alphabetized, etc. (Plus I don't think we need James Chance, James White, and the Contortions as three separate listings....) To improve the article, maybe we could have a vote on the criteria for listing bands. I see three options: A) include any band verifiably in the genre (in which case Ghostyard stays), B) include only notable bands (in which case much of the list should be pruned), C) as a middle road include any obscure band that has commercially released recordings, and these even if only on compilations and/or now out of print. What I would like to see is a listing that could help someone with limited familiarity with the genre who would like to know more, e.g. "hey, this Teenage Jesus album my friend lent me is cool, what other bands like this can I check out?", which I see as my Option C. Any support for editing using this criteria? -Bert 171.159.64.10 22:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I vote option B. The No New York bands. Branca's bands. Maybe Rosa Yemen, Suicide, Lizzy Mercier Descloux and a couple others.--128.205.167.6 01:21, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

this article is completely NOT comprehensive. and there should DEFINITELY be a differentiation between neo-no wave/or no-wave riff-off acts like die monitrr bats and more classic acts like Mars, Rhys Chatham, etc. in the listing.

AGREED. I'm gonna revamp this soon, and to end all the bickering about what is and is not no wave, I'm going to create citations. --128.205.122.73 20:18, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay, since it's been over a month, and nothing has been resolved, I went ahead and changed the list. I can't say it's much of an improvement, but it's a start. We can always narrow it down more- I just didn't want to strip it all the way down without any discussion. I'm all for option c: ideally, there should be a strong 10-12 artists/bands . There's no need to list each and every band vaguely associated with no wave. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DuckieRotten (talk • contribs) 03:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC).