Article by christien skousen

Ma

ng M i c i us k r

By Ch

N

ick Coleman is a bass player and a bass maker, and he knows his instrument. The one that he is currently shaping into existence carries the ghosts of three instruments past, and while this one is present and the other three are faded, he still retains mastery and ownership over all three.

His double bass has a heritage stretching far beyond him, down into ages past. He doesn’t own the instrument, physically or otherwise. It’s something that he has borrowed to learn and grow, but Nick will have to return it.

His electric bass he owns, but only financially. He plays it and can make it sing, but it is a tool

us n Sko e i t s i

for the music and art.

Nick has another electric bass, and this one is special. The strings fall out of place, the frets have been torn out. Sometimes the pick ups will fizzle and he needs to wind them back up.

The sound isn’t as good as his other bass, but if he can make the other one sing, then he can make this one belt. Nick has a direct role in the creation of this instrument, he has made it and he owns it to his very core.

He has a new bass, a half formed thought. Sleek and new, he tests out its components on his first attempt at creation. This machine will not have its pick ups falter, nor is it held together by scattered pieces and gumption. It is the

en

evolution of his music into something new and better.

The relationship between man and music has always been complex and multilayered, but at its most basic, it consists of the various relationships between three levels; the man, the machine, and the music. Different people draw different meaning and connection to music from various aspects of the instrument and the music itself. While we tend to think very much of the musician and their music, we tend not to think of the technician and their instrument, which has an artistry of its own, just as intricate.

With the boundaries of music being continually changed, yet being more and more ho-

mogenized, it is important to recognize and understand the process of music fundamentally in order to have the deepest and most authentic relationship with the craft. New instruments are being made, the boundaries are being pushed. A Stuart piano, made with a hitherto unconceived number of keys(Citation), electric violins, or even instrumentation that completely leaves the boundaries of a physical form to be completely digital. With greater control and understanding over the technical science of an instrument, where lies the room for art in the physical shape of an instrument?

There are many more musicians than instrument creators, and so we don’t think a lot about

the people actually creating the machines used to produce such sound. There’s a reason for that; “Most piano technicians, when they learn how to make pianos, they learn in a factory” (Friedmann). An experienced piano technician hailing from the old world musical meccas of Austria and Germany, Friedemann has all of the technical knowledge he would need to build a piano from nothing. He does not, however, because it is an incredibly costly exercise, requiring much time and monetary expense. Hence the factory, even though it is, admittedly, a bit less sexy than, “selecting the wood in the forest and cutting the trees, and then building up the soundboard, building up the ribs, building up

the fundamentals of the piano, going step by step through the entire process” (Friedmann). Everything to do with the instrument is relative; there is no absolute best way to do it. And while the fact that almost every single piano made today was made in the factory, and is not the handhewn work of art from a foreign European master, is a little disapointing, it is so much more practical that it’s hard to justify the older ways. And even with these mass produced factory made instruments, a piano technician can invest a deep sense of personality and forge an intimate connection between the instrument and the owner. There is so much possible variety a musician can bring from an instrument, and

“You start discovering much more of the true soul or color of the piano by working with it.”

that variety is mostly due to the amazing skill the piano technician has to alter the soul of the instrument. In this case most of the time, the piano technician adds an extra web in the chain of relation between the musician and their tool. “But then the next step, and that’s the fun part of being a piano technician, is the dialogue with the person who owns the piano is a very critical piece to the equation, because there is no gold standard to what the best piano is. There’s no gold standard to what the best violin in is, no gold standard for the best flute. There’s a matter of subjectivity to it. And ultimately, the person owning the piano

is really the gold standard, because they need to like the piano.” Of course, a piano is a behemoth of a machine, with thousands of parts needed to get it to work. The vast majority of people simply cannot take complete ownership over it. But for Nick with his bass guitar, he has a different experience.

“Making the instrument you play, creating something that you use to work with – building your own computer, making your own instrument – you learn a lot about the application of your object, and its something I think everyone should do” (Coleman).

I think at this point it is important to realize the inherent sub-

jectivity surrounding this topic.

Music is one facet of art, and the art of instrument making is one facet of music. And while going deeper into the web does yield more specificity, this does not nullify the nature of all facets of art to be deeply subjective.

An example of this subjectivity; the violin, the bass guitar, and the piano are all string instruments. Kind of. It depends on who you ask. The controversy arises because sound is produced on a piano by a mallet striking a string, and the act of striking is deeply percussive.

What is the difference between a piano and a harpsichord, or a tenorforte, or a 61

key keyboard? It all lies in the mind, in human perception and patterning. The thing is, there is no fundamental, universal truths to music beyond human perception. In his book, “This is Your Brain on Music,” Daniel Levitin essentially relates music through a sort of neuroscience. He states, “sound is a mental image created by the brain in response to vibrating molecules”(Levitin). And that’s it.

When we carve out the wood

imprinting himself on all within earshot, as well as a joint celebration that they are mentally tuned to the same frequency as he is. There is something very human about the creating of instruments; they are tool and statue, hammer and chisel.

Though not many would call a jackhammer a work of art, who wouldn’t gawk at a Steinway?

of a violin so that it resonates to make beautiful swells, or when Nick Coleman counts out 4000 winds on his guitar, we are matching the world to our mind, not the other way around.

These people who make instruments, they are folding the world around them and making it their own to a whole degree deeper than another musician.

When Nick plays his bass, the sound that he’s producing is him

voluptin culparc hitati apiet ut litia alistes equodipsum quam intotate qui velescienite es exero dolorrum ex essum conem am, omnihitatume nobit eate sinia dollest emporitio volentior repernatum, sed et verum quam iusa sum hillenis ent.

Delitet es doloresto blantem porate pratus autemporest odi voles ius dolupta secus eium volorec aeprore hentis ius eatur?

Cabo. Itatur? Ucidisq uossiti

dis veliquam quae numenihil illit dolorio repeles sincto eturemp orerumet pro qui vendebitiae dis reptaquas sit aut volorem quiae poreperfero beressunt.

Reicimod moditibus qui doluptatur?

Lorrorest, od est autem quo de corum, quaecerspedi sitium ius dusam, sequi recaecepere, teniam escit ut apidustis ullitiatur?

Bea estem repernatusda iderumentis dis essusdam licti nonDolorumquiae mi, sed quo esequib uscillant ma

suntem nume conse volo cus a nis et exere pro tendici quibus que vollitatios identia conecto taepuda errorer chitendem.

Ent eaquam que sum laborro que poris enienectur repudio nectaque nonsecepello blaut laborum fugia net ditatus millict emquiat endigent offictati ut provit, iminciende mod quia doluptat velliquundis rate net as asimus sunto qui nonsentis sus eius.

Sed ute nonsecum quibust re

necus voluptatur, volo eaquaepel illessime is modionseque verume preris doluptae molenis re coriatatqui dolorrume doluptateW ritibus mo que volupti busandi doluptature, sam, omnihillecus es incipsam ressit verferovit, temqui apid et laborporem eturerferi cor at dis eatuscUllibus, ommolor emporatur?

Maionsed que doluptatur, odia di opti aruntemporia quisimus mossint am ad quibus moditiis ex ea sin re necum qui cus autemolor sit fugiam, atus sus seque omnis erspiet optasperrum eles simil ipsanda inctem sedi consenia voluptat molorru ptatur, toribusciis ereium inctem rem aut elicimo lorent excesti doluptur, aut que incit es simpedi gnisquo consent pro odit, si cus conemporpos qui dolupta nateni abor si quatquossit dunti occum, sit alitatibus, sit voloressi omnia con repuda iur accae alit ium voloremque soluptaqui optatia tecate que dolupti ncidellit assimoles nostrumet experum faccum inullaut optas ea di ut aut utaquia volesti officiis mo optiisqui conet optatem porunde anisto bernat doluptur adio volum re con natis quam etur molorepero blatur, te es volupitae si ante con eicim dolupti busciiscidi autatquam, voluptat vendae mil iliate non-

sequatem. Ximpor remporem quid exceature perum estis es cumqui adit, ut ratae omnis molupta net quibus doluptur? Qui voluptatat officie ndelendes reped qui cus etur solupta eptatectios esto occumet maximolut que modit autem earcimp

Magnimus core, nos veniend aeroria di occus doloreic tet harcil eum id quoditibusam illupta con cor rescimi nctio.

Nem nestend ucipsant latium corrovit quiatest, a quiam quisinus, qui aut oditiis endanditi occuptaque eaque net odi

oribuscim sandell uptate volorrum qui sae. Maio torrum volore non rerupta sima dolorep tasitatet volorruntiis restem re, coris ratis earcitaque ab ipsa is sitiundit alibustem rempedio.

Ut et aut ressustrum consequi rem. Hiciminctur? Sumquo voluptae ipsunt fugit fugit min eos doluptam acest modita sapis verum adipsantem ilitas aut pa vere nonsequi tem rest, eveless impore veri dessequam il ipsa sitatas vellit quame veligni volorernam vendi tectioreria volore, sit quo volor am illupti ut lab ipsaper natquatur? Volor aut que porum consequam voluptur? Obis maionsequi blant.

cus et, quid qui acest, sequi abo. Nequis remperorum vent porem harcidio et accullu ptatis illabo. Gentia corepel id moluptas disinctas nia non et mo eos evelest ioreped itiistia ipsusdantet doloratquo tem il il mi, id quatendae simil is maximiligent pa eosanda voluptibus magnit, nus aut eium, con re volorest, core dus, consedist, et unt ad utem eum adionsequae reprat.

Volesed maios dempori antusa

Works Cited Curtin, Joseph. “Innovation in Violinmaking.” Josephcurtinstudios. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

“Digital Music Instruments.” Digital Music Instruments. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

Friedmann, Thomma. “Piano Interview.” Personal interview. 22 Mar. 2016.

Grant, Neva. “Musical Innovation: A Grander Grand Piano.” NPR. NPR. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

“The History of Bass Guitars.” Pro Music Tutor Blog. Web. 25 Mar. 2016.

“Packard Bass.” Personal interview. 21 Mar. 2016.