Faqt
Vol. 3 / Issue 3  [1999]
A Conversation with... Atom Heart
 The Atom Heart (aka Uwe Schmidt) has produced dozens of CDs and 12-inch singles during the last decade or so. He has created a large catalog of electronic music in diverse styles, working alone under numerous aliases (Lassigue Bendthaus, `I', Señor Coconut...), and in collaboration with other composers, including Tetsu Inoue, Victor Sol, and Bernd Friedmann. His aesthetics have developed from minimalistic techno and electro-industrial, through pleasing, abstract ambience, to fine cheese, highly individual techno-pop, and digital patterns.

Digital Communication
The following candid conversations between Atom Heart [AH] and Mark Kolmar [MK] (aka recording artist Burning Rome) were extracted from an email exchange, edited slightly and presented in this continuous format with the permission of both parties. We Believe this is one of the most in depth interviews with Atom Heart to exist on paper.
AH: Nice to hear from you! Thanks for updating me about your activities. Good that things are moving on your side.

About paying dues. Actually I never thought about it like that. When I was doing the first records I did not think about moving away from the sound the record companies were accepting.
MK: I assume that when you say "first records", you mean the discs on POD and tracks from that time. You must admit that they are structured in a more conventional way than the more individual sound of the R.I. discs.
AH: Yes, indeed they are structured in a very conventional way, but at that time, at least to me, it was something very new and exciting, even a realm you could explore. Techno was a new thing in 1990 and this kind of minimal abstractness (which seems today not very challenging to me anymore) was really thrilling... for a time I had the philosophy that generic sound is the solution... overloading the system... well, philosophies change...
MK: If you mean sensory overload or maximalism, that has been a common thread in my music for a long while. For some reason I enjoy repetition mainly in other people's music. I like music with too many sounds, and music with too few sounds.
AH: No, not like that. To me, the techno movement, with probably a couple of thousand new releases a week, is a perfect example of saturation. I am not talking about a sensual overload, actually the music itself doesn't matter. It is about an overload of the system, in this case the music market as a part of the capitalist system. Consumer society per definition means growth. This growth is self consuming, a cultural and monetary feedback. Releasing more and more music, theoretically a natural process of capitalism, 'cause no increase is equivalent to decrease, at a certain point is destroying the music market itself by dissolving its structures.
MK: Yes, I see this happening to some degree. However, I see more "scenes" and "styles", more segregated and separated. As we have discussed before, every new combination, every different rhythmic nuance, seems to develop its own, enclosed, self-limited "scene". You and I may not care much about the stylistic boundaries. But for many people, it is a way to feel better about themselves, to be part of the "in crowd" in smaller and smaller "scenes". I hope this is a transitional phase which will lead to no boundaries.
AH: Unfortunately I don't think it will change. Music has a very important social value which actually has nothing to do with the music itself, but rather, as you said, with belonging to something or somebody (mostly groups). I recently thought, that probably only one person who really likes music only for the sake of music, is the musician himself... all the others... labels, distributors, sellers, promoters and even in big parts the listeners or consumers are following another trace... with exceptions I guess (I hope).
MK: I am not sure you could have jumped into the sound of Brown or Mono TM etc. right away.
AH: But to go directly to stuff like brown, etc. at this time would have been impossible anyway. I guess I was not able to do that kind of stuff at that time. You have to develop and leave certain things behind. I even think that this sound would not have interested me in 1990... Of course after a while, most of the time after 2 weeks, I cannot connect to the material anymore, but I guess that's normal and I accepted this as a natural process.
MK: When you say "connect" - do you mean that the material turns into just music, as if someone else recorded it, or that you have moved on to other material and it is no longer relevant to your mind?
AH: In every piece I try to realize an idea, or an image, or a technique, or a style, or a fusion... etc. These ideas, images, etc. are in my head for a long time. Once the thing is done I can go to the next step which means altering the idea, image, concept, etc. to another level. This automatically means that you are always looking back on your music and consider it something done, knowing that you are into a different level now. I realize all the things I would do different today (not because they are good or bad, but simply because I am different...) and simply cannot connect with the former idea anymore... very often old stuff sounds very exciting, because I don't know how I have done it... and why? Yes, it is no longer relevant to my mind... very often listening to old stuff, I wish I could reproduce that particular feeling or concept I had at that time, but my senses are somewhere else and finally this is even better.
MK: I find that when I do some music, and it sticks in my mind and I listen to it, that is a good sign. Also when I listen to it, and forget in the middle that I was the person who recorded it, that is a good sign too. It means I am hearing the music for what it is, and not wanting to change it because I hear anything “wrong”.
AH: Right now I have the feeling (much more than in the past) to move away from the things I did in the past. I am more and more interested in a pop approach of music than into pure abstract music (or even minimal sound which I think is pretty outdated).
MK: Minimal in what sense? I think in many ways everyone has merely scratched the surface.
AH: Like a 909-beat and a 303... that kind of stuff, anything that repeats more than it should.
MK: I have limited patience for that kind of music because it can offer only so many surprises. I like it best when the patterns are ambiguous, so you can follow the very same pattern from one bar to the next, but your mind has different paths to follow. As I suggested earlier, though, when I work on anything like this hardly two bars in a row are the same - it is more like if you mixed and cut a half-dozen of those tracks together. Except the sounds are not like DJ fodder. I have said for years that one can get away with anything on top of a straight 4/4 beat.

Minimalism is not based on repetition and change, but rather on elegant ways to use and develop very simple patterns. Morton Feldman said, it is similar to the “crippled symmetry” (his term) in rugs and tapestries. But I think this is a direction which demands further exploration.
AH: I perfectly remember listening to the first acid song. The song was infinite without any changes but the 303 modulation and the visual background was only a strobe. This kind of abstractness was the total kick of the moment. Each product since was something like a soundtrack of the times to me, even a very personal thing... When you take this conceptual abstractness very serious (like I did), the pure musical point seems not too important. It’s all a question of perspective. With R.I. this changed, or even before. The R.I. stuff has nothing to do with discos or the approach I described before.

The whole scene connected to the last convulsions of techno, including drum and bass, intelligent, etc. seems not very attractive to me. I think a fusion out of a technological sound and pop is very challenging. I will start (and continue) with a couple of projects this year.
MK: I have to admit I don't enjoy much of the recent "techno" or "intelligent" (aka IDM) either, although the edgier D'n'B gives me a good rush of energy. Some aspects are a big influence on me, but I don't think anyone would think of any of my music as pure techno or IDM or whatever else - similar in some ways but hard to classify.

I think of certain techno producers. It is very adventurous as dancefloor music, but now when I get a new 12" it's just "Oh, another very well done 4 tracks of strictly repetitive, complex rhythms over straight 4/4 kick." Pretty much like the last dozen. And still ahead of the pack...
AH: This movement started with the terms futuristic and progressive in its early pamphlets, but honestly the entire movement are as stuck in their own past as Paul McCartney. This would not be too bad...if you hadn't the word progressive on your forehead. I don't mind musicians doing the same stuff over and over, even admire this in some cases, but not if this is a contradiction to what you claim your philosophy. A rocker playing his guitar can't be blamed, he never claimed that the future was his, but with techno and it's heroes I am a bit more rigid in this point. There are still people doing the 303/909 stuff and think that this is really progressive. I find the discrepancy between the actual aesthetic output and the overall philosophy the problem here.
MK: Many times I would listen to what was coming out of the mixer, and I would ask myself, "If this were a record by someone else, would you like it?" And I would say yes. Then I would ask, "Are you happy with this for what you want to make?". And mostly the answer would be "no".

Real-time manipulations are not a priority for me. I know some electronic musicians set up their gear to be able to have as much real-time control as possible. To some degree or another, you have clearly been doing that. Maybe not quite as much lately.
AH: I am not sure what you mean with "real-time control". If meaning "turning knobs while a composition is running", I agree that I am not doing this too much.
MK: I mean "turning knobs" only in part. Most of the time I don't play on the keyboard, or the other controller, but rather punch in the notes and other events one at a time, like writing on paper. But unlike paper, I can copy, cut, paste, alter... In some of the earlier R.I., it sounds like you did more playing and programming in real time. More recent material does not sound that way.
AH: Ah, understand... that's true.

On R.I. I usually like to investigate the language and technique of music, rather than expecting to reach the final goal. Don't know if I can make that clear... Parts from what I have tried on the last R.I. releases will finally reappear in the full picture... This doesn't mean that the productions before the final picture are less important or less complete, they are simply different angles on the final picture so to say.
MK: Like sketchbooks? or fully-realized pictures which may indicate a direction without finally going to the place where you finally want to go?
AH: The last one. Sketchbooks, not really. Rather then a sketch which turns into a full picture, but still is just a complete sketch... able to stand for itself.
MK: I think intention in art is a very slippery thing.
AH: I agree 100%. This is why I think your opinion is yours (and right), and my intention is mine (and right). There is simply no compatibility. Questions like "What was your intention" simply don't match the game, because my intention is self-centered. I am not sending decodable messages to people, but rather triggers or images.
MK: Even so, effective communication is possible.
AH: What is effective communication then?
MK: It is possible when I put the object on the ground, and you pick it up and interpret it, that you may take from it something very close (or close enough) to what I put in, so that we can call it effective communication.
AH: I simply think that with doing the music I said enough. I also think in 100% of my work that it is not that much about giving answers to things but rather to ask questions. Most works simply exist because the entire complex is a big question mark to me.
MK: I think so also. And I think this is true for me as well - trying to put together a puzzle. As you said, part of the purpose is to make sense out of nonsense, nonsense out of sense.
AH: Machines. I am still not using a computer... except for doing DSP processing. I find the sequencing software very inconvenient and not musical at all. They give you a strange feeling and are bad musical interfaces. Also I dislike visualizing the programming. It distracts from sound.
MK: I think the visual and the audio parts of my brain are tied together. I think about sounds and music as colors and shapes anyway, so for me it helps. When the music plays, I "see" motion like choreography, but the abstract motion of sounds instead of a person dancing. Sometimes I even have small "leak" of sound into my vision. I find that things which have a good flow musically mostly look good, and vice-versa.
AH: I do not visualize any music that way. Difficult to explain, but my images don't have pictures, rather feelings in a very abstract way... also, especially in Cubase, you always have your entire song or arrangement connected to this time axis. You see your breaks and cuts and fills and permanently are confronted with the time of your song (at least when I was working in studios where they were using it). It really distracts from music. I think you develop a much sharper hearing, not looking on your music.
MK: Do you mean the way you always see the duration?
AH: Yes.
MK: Mostly I have a duration in mind before I start, but that is subject to change depending what I hear...
AH: Same with me...
MK: ...with eyes closed, or not looking at the screen at least.
AH: That seems to be the difference... I have no visual seduction, therefore my eyes are always open...
MK: But can you look at your whole piece at once, if you want to? Or maybe you never want to...
AH: No I couldn't... and I don't know why I should want to, since I have the structure in my head...I trust my musical sense here... the visualization of music is offering these obsessions and many musicians I know lose their hearing because seeing is spoiling it.
MK: But the thing is, music is one type of art which is time-based, so you cannot hear it all at once. The sequencer can let you see a representation, though.
AH: Most producers which are using Cubase and related visual sequencing software do not have a strong enough image of what they want.
MK: OK. So then it seems you locate your target and shoot directly at it. I go around in a spiral, going around and getting closer until I reach a place I want to be. I might start with one sound, or one rhythm, or an overall feeling, then add flesh to the skeleton so to speak. Sometimes that is very quick, and sometimes it takes a while.

I saw an author on a talk show once - I wish I could remember his name. But he said "quality costs"... as a writer (composer, etc) you show your respect and appreciation for the audience by giving them quality, and you have to pay for this.

Obviously, technology can make this less costly (in terms of time at least).

I even like the aesthetic of someone like Masami Akita (Merzbow), in which content becomes very arbitrary - but his chaos/overload resonates with me, and I have patience for it. However, I see from various discussions that many people consider the amount of material he released during '95-'96 (give or take) as a sign of disrespect.

I wanted to ask about the R.I. release schedule, which has been much slower than in the past - not entirely a bad thing, but I wanted to ask if your move to Chile caused problems or a disruption, if you made a choice to approach things in a different way, or?
AH: Well, the R.I. schedule change had a couple of reasons. First of all the new situation here in Chile changed the work flow quite a bit. I had to install all the stuff, get the communication flowing, etc. Also, after 6 months I was moving again, to another house and this interrupted again. Another thing was, that Pop Artificielle took a lot of time too. Pop Artificielle had priority the last year, and this of course meant less time for other things... and R.I. had to suffer.
MK: Concerning your move to Chile, part of me would like that type of isolation. Another part could let me become isolated in a bad way. On the other hand it could be just the opposite, so that some things that I can take for granted here (such as television) could become trivial - and maybe lead to a better way to live. I don't know. Unfortnately the inertia is strong.
AH: In my case, the isolation was well decided. I think being disconnected from certain things (especially the music scene you are classified in) is helping a lot. To me it is a chance to develop something unique.
MK: I feel somewhat disconnected from things as it is. In particular, I have noticed that I do not see boundaries in the music scene(s) where others do. Or I disregard boundaries that have more to do with social divisions than musical divisions.
AH: I think it is a difference if you feel disconnected... but still receive all kinds of messages you don't want to receive, or if you really cut the line. I feel better here since the average scene talk and the typical discourse does not reach me.
MK: I feel comfortable in many ways being an outsider on the inside, so to speak. I can avoid the media outlets I don't want to watch or hear. But I do have access to some programs I enjoy. i also have access to complete trash, which can be inspiring as something to react against. I don't read music magazines, except Rolling Stone. I have subscribed to that for years, and I suppose I must enjoy it enough to keep renewing. I used to skim NME and Melody Maker, but haven't for a while. Somehow I hear about everything anyway.
AH: Funny isn't it? I don't read any magazines... neither music nor computer biz... etc, and for some reason I always know what's going on... if I want to. Guess I can live without it.
MK: Concerning Pop Artificielle, would you say you have done the covers in a radically revisionist way?
AH: My perspective on the covers is more like doing an update which of course means doing it different (not better... this is relative). Of course there are songs which are almost impossible to do better (like many Beatles songs for example). My selection is made out of songs which triggered something in me... they triggered another version. I could hear the new arrangement perfectly. Sometimes while working or analyzing the songs, they unveiled a new face to me and I started to redefine my ideas and modify the song into something more ambivalent... like James Brown's "Superbad" where his soul sounds completely mechanical and gives (hopefully) the song a new meaning... I think that's what's a cover is about...
MK: What was the method of working for some "jam"-like recordings like H.A.T., Jet Chambers, Lisa Carbon, maybe Roger Tubesound or others? One problem I had with these (less with H.A.T. though) was the different parts didn't seem to change in reaction to each other. So it was maybe a little stuff. I will guess that this method with Bernd makes the result feel looser.
AH: All of them had different approaches and different ways to compose. Some are intended to be stiff and even use this stiffness as an aesthetic parameter, while others were simply done like that without actually thinking too much about it... If different parts change in reaction to each other is a very specific thing you sometimes simply don't care about because the focus is another thing.

The record I did for example with Bernd Friedman was done in a very different way. It was a kind of experiment too and it worked. We had the idea of non-repetitive structures. This means avoiding any kind of loop or similar composing technique.

Finally each song had hundreds of cuts, as I said sometimes each 10 seconds or less. The result was quite surprising. We both had never worked like that before and were a bit afraid to get lost in this process, but the opposite was the case. In none of the songs you hear the cuts.

We wanted to diffuse the line between real and synthetic and in some parts the naturally sounding structures are breaking into completely convulsive absurdities and vice versa. One song which starts up with clicks and digital dropouts from a broken dat tape slowly transforms into a pure jazz-trio piece until DAT dropouts are taking it apart again.

Jet Chamber for example are all done in Pete's studio and I have no access to his system, means I don't know how to use most of his equipment (it is too much equipment anyway). This means I give him elements or we jam together, but it is 100% up to him what to do with it... Roger Tubesound sounds like jamming in parts but actually is all editing (a little bit like the production with Bernd but focused on different on different things...). Anyway, I like stiffness...
MK: I played the first track of Senor Coconut for a friend of mine. He said some portions were pleasing, and others were like nails on a chalkboard because of the stiff timing.
AH: Exactly...
MK: I can hardly stop myself from laughing when that ridiculous drum solo comes in.
AH: Me too...
MK: I can't quite tell if that is played with maybe 10-20 drum samples.
AH: Nope...
MK: Or different "phrases"/"gestures" from records.
AH: Nope...
MK: Or even one long sample with some processing.
AH: Yes...some 40's Latin bebop record...sampled on 8 bit...
MK: Something in my thinking would not allow me to use such a long sample. It is still effective, and the sample would be anonymous to just about anyone.
AH: Usually I am not using long samples at all, but this one was actually calling me...Also Senor Coconut to me is something like a latin revenge record... You know the South American music industry gives a shit about copyrights, etc. and they are basically releasing whatever they want without asking permission to anybody. This affects Latin artists as well as western artists the same way.
MK: Have you heard Gondwanaland by Steroid Maximus (aka Foetus)? Much Senor Coconut reminds me a bit of that. But Foetus sounds more aggressive, and also more like big-band American jazz. In any case, you might look into it.
AH: Yes, I guess I heard it at a friend's place one day, but didn't like it too much, actually exactly for the parameters you described... too aggressive... too full and not funny enough...
MK: I don't really think about making a product.
AH: I always do.
MK: Maybe the classical education for me... I might have to think about product more in the future.

I think one significant difference in our personalities seems to be that in a given situation I will almost always take the route which provides me with more options later.
AH: I am definitely not that type. Once I have chosen a direction I take it until the end. If this means only having one route and no options, it be so. I will not alter the route for obtaining the wanted. The route (in this case limitation) is a part of the process and a part of the result as well.
MK: Is that to say you choose certain equipment, and then you are content to allow that gear to influence or determine the direction you take? I do that to some degree, I'm sure, but I frequently change directions in midstream. In that sense, the process is very important to the result.
AH: Not changing the concept in the middle of the production is essential to me. This forced way of working very often brought very good results... lt's sometimes like standing at the end of a one-way street, looking for a way out, without going backwards. Sometimes painful though.
MK: Do you like to set certain limits, or work within certain restrictions, to avoid the distraction of options and choices? For me, anything is subject to change at any time. However, I obviously have to give up some focus to allow that freedom. I don't know the destination until I get there.
AH: For one side, once you have set the parameters and be strict with it, distraction does not appear. Mostly when I lose the concept, which sometimes happens when I am not concentrated or running out of time. I realize that I start trying options, but it never works out until I get the concept clear.
MK: Regardless of the effect on the results, it is hard for me to have fun that way. I wouldn't say the concept changes, though - instead, it becomes dearer as I work. Or, another way, it may take some time to discover the raw materials that match the concept. If I put a track together over 3 days or even a month, the ideas that come to me, or the ideas triggered by the process, give a result that I may not have been able to find otherwise.
AH: Well, I am not that stuck into the same routines, or at least I am trying to avoid them. On most forms or productions you can apply what I said, although on some, every so often, I try to avoid to strict concepts or plans, and take whatever comes (always within preferences, of course). In general the concept mostly is just an aesthetic concept, than one dealing with something like sense, it's more an associative work and the sense or the wider picture comes with the progress.
MK: As it is now, I have about 6 hours a day in which to fit all listening, composing, reading, exercise, going out, etc.
AH: Good for you. Not many people have enough energy after their job doing anything else but watching TV. I have the whole day for music and related works and in peak times I spent up to 14 hours in the studio... but I am trying to cut that down a bit.
MK: Would you say the number of recordings you make is a goal in itself? That is, do you feel obligated or compelled somehow to finish a lot of music?
AH: I don't think the amount of records itself is any kind of goal. I have another problem. I think. I really try not to work too much and not to think too much about things like projects, products, concepts, etc.. but the thing is, I cannot switch off my mind. Very often these ideas or concepts really fascinate me and I cannot resist leaving them undone. This results in a huge pile of next projects which never stops or gets less. I don't know what to do. Even from a simple joke sometimes a great project is arising. So, I have to do it for my own satisfaction, but not thinking in release numbers.
MK: I don't want to say something (we talked about that earlier), but I guess there are certain structures, or certain feelings, or aesthetic effects I want to create, and I have no urge to do more.
AH: That describes it. Thank you.
MK: At the same time, I take no issue with anyone who has an urge to express himself in any different way. In fact, I admire the focus of someone who can explore one area in many different ways. That is an altogether different kind of patience than what I have.
AH: Agreed.
MK: I was saying before that it seems like you are inspired to create albums in somewhat the same way I am inspired to create tracks. One reason I think I approach it the way I do is the influence of symphonies for example, or the Beatles' "white album" - that is, a complete work which embraces many different things.
AH: I always consider an album as an independent entity, something that could be done in exactly that way, but by another artist. Something like turning into another personality for some time. Once it is finished, a new picture is on the plan and this pretty much satisfies my need for diversity. I think it is very diverse.
MK: Sometimes, for my taste, the records stay too much on one angle.
AH: That's the idea.

Some days ago I listened to your CD. The material reminded me quite a lot of the tape you sent me the other time to Frankfurt. I have to admit that it was a little bit too rough for my taste.

Also of course I was listening to the timing and none of the songs sounded stiff but neither they sounded tight. Actually I had the feeling that lots of events were anything but tight?! Any special idea behind that or is it a technical thing? I am curious.
MK: If you consider the amount of variation in timing that is already programmed, a little bit more "slop" doesn't mean too much. Either I got used to it, or else the result was pretty much what I was trying to get anyway. Some of it is supposed to sound like it is skittering across an icy road or something. The new setup is more precise and more accurate. So then some of the time I scatter some of the events randomly... Very often, at the back of my mind at least, the idea is to get away from a precise, accurate, mechanical sound - which may or may not resemble a more human timing.
AH: I don't think so. I had the feeling that the entire structure of events was untight and moving back and forth all the time...
MK: Yes, it does. I think the plan worked.
AH: With your music I was having a very similar experience like I had with the music of Victor Sol (my partner in +N) which is that I like how it sounds and actually like the ideas, but at the same time some sort of roughness doesn't let me enjoy it.
MK: Not at all surprising. As I say, it reflects my state of mind; this is what comes naturally to me. Your musical world has a lot more sunshine.
AH: Probably that's the point. I miss the sunshine.
MK: I assume you mean roughness, in the sense of harshness or heaviness, rather than sloppy or unfinished?
AH: Exactly... the sunshine. Music is a discourse and to believe that I am, or any artist is, superior to the consumer and could give advice to them is simply arrogant and ignorant. I am just encoding my life into music and do not believe that anyone on this planet could or should decode it 1:1. Fuzziness is the term.
Lassigue Bendthaus, "Pop Artificielle" out now on Kk Records

Flanger (Atom Heart and Bernd Friedmann), "Templates" out now on Ninja Tune

Burning Rome, "Senseless" out now on Mindfield Records