* * * * * * * kdm

Vor ein paar Wochen hatte ich wieder mal ein Interview vermittelt; beim anfragenden Journalisten hatte ich ein gutes Gefühl und es hat nicht getäuscht. Hier ist das Ergebnis.

The use of the computer for creating – as well as storing and re-using – musical recordings makes it difficult for a compiler to collect accounts of such recordings for an accurate discography.
. . . . . Before, with tapes, it also was not easy, but now with the new technique it's a nightmare. Today, the results are not visible anymore, the new digital signal processing methods are 100% virtual; there are no tape boxes anymore on shelves, no touchable and visible 2-, 4-, 8-, 16-, or 24-track master tapes, but just plenty of Zeros and Ones on harddisks (or little sticks, or whatever). And worse: It's so very easy now to reuse or recycle this musical material. With the right software it's so simple to change the key of a piece, the speed, the rhythm, play it upside down, etc. and use the same or the altered piece (or parts of it) again for a "new" recording (hence the sudden fashion of "re-mixes", because, I repeat: it's so very easily done today).
. . . . . However, for an observer and compiler it's hard to keep tracks = which musical snippet was done when? changed when? by whom? and used where? and how often? This brings the artistry of serious discographical work not to an end, but ...
. . . . . I fear that it also makes the music more arbitrary (= beliebig) and worthless. By coincidence this is happening at the end of a century and maybe it also marks the end of an era. Not many of the younger people collect music anymore, as it was seriously done in the past with the old formats on DISCs: schellack, vinyl. What is left to report about for a DISCographer, are just the obvious final results, the released discs (or any other tangible, touchable & visible medium in the future) as long as those will be still offered and used.

Mr. Mueller has put some clever subdivisions on numerous longer tracks in the set [and else]. Some people may think it's useless, but in my opinion it helps to understand the piece structure and helps to better remember some passages in it. For example, in "L'opera aperta", the "Scherzi a parte" section is a strong one, but distinctive from the other ones (it's also a favorite one!). We have the precise moment and duration with kdm's subtitles. I'm also more attentive when each section changes. Just take a look at your cd player! The song structure is sometimes complex, evolutive, etc. It's also a great reason why I prefer the Ultima Editions albums in comparison with KS regular albums. I remember the "Vie de rêve" structure more easily than the "Dune" one, just because of these subdivisions.

(from a longer article by Frederic Letourneau from Canada, in The KS Circle from October 2001, about THE ULTIMATE EDITION; most of this 50-CD set's music was later reissues in La Vie Electronique, vol. 1-16.
The subdivisions and its (sub-)titles are all mentioned in detail on the covers or in the booklets of the CDs and sets (and in THE WORKS), but - because of space - not in the Schulze website discography)

British PROG magazine has just released what they call "The Synth Issue!". There is also a pleasing article about the "true musical maverick" KS on pages 44 and 45, based on an interview that I had arranged two months earlier.

It is well known by those who listen to Klaus Schulze's music, that he's not playing Rock'n'Roll oder "Rock". What Klaus is creating with his brain, heart, belly and instruments is not yet clearly expressed, but "Rock"...?
Anyway, here is a website that tells us the plain truth:

Our "official" Klaus Schulze website was set online for the first time on the 20th of August 1996. We don't have a screenshot from these first days or weeks, but we have one that visitor numero One Million has made and kindly sent us eight years ago:

After 20 years with more than two million visitors, we have now deleted the counter, for technical reasons.

A friendly request to all the designers and wannebe designers who offer their "help": No, we don't want to "make the site more fashionable"; our intention was and is to offer (plenty of) facts for those who search for facts about KS and his music. Gadgets, gimmicks and diversion are not our metier. Not ev'rything that is possible must also be done. The world (& the www) is already full of needless crap, and we don't want to add more of the same kind. If you use an ad blocker and/or Ghostery, you may have already noticed that there is nothing on our KS website that makes these (otherwise very helpful) tools necessary.

My sincere thanks go to Lennart Koschella, who is editing the site technically from the very beginning, and still ...because he likes the music of Klaus Schulze. Yes, he's doing it beside his daily work. See also his informative anniversary text in the official KS website: "No rumours, no gossip, no bling-bling, just facts and information."

In der offiziellen KS website hab ich seit sehr vielen Jahren diese Anmerkung drin:

... please do not send a mail when you are not man enough to get an honest answer, which can be different of what you want and expect. In other words: If you accept just the one answer that you prefer, better don't start to write and ask. ...

Überraschender- und erfreulicherweise ist da noch jemand gleicher Meinung: "Nicht fragen, wenn man eine andere Antwort als die, die man erwartet, nicht vertragen kann!" (Max Goldt in "Die Chefin verzichtet", Rowohlt Berlin Verlag, 2012)

Gestern kam ein Brief mit wichtigen Unterlagen, den ich an KS geschickt hatte, an mich zurück. Heute kam ein zweiter Brief, den ich an KS einen Tag später ebenfalls mit der Briefpost geschickt hatte, auch noch zurück. Beide hatten den postalische Vermerk, dass man dem "Empfänger nicht ermitteln kann".
Seit 40 Jahren wohnt KS an der gleichen Adresse und hat natürlich in all den Jahren reichlich(!) Briefe, Päckchen, Pakete erhalten; immer unter dieser gleichen Adresse. Auch in- und ausländischen Kollegen und Journalisten fanden Klaus unter dieser Adresse, siehe zum Beispiel die Fotos aus den Jahren 2005 (WDR), 2007 (Lisa Gerrard) und 2009 (BBC) in der KS website.
Nun plötzlich meint die zuständige Deutsche Post AG, sie könne "den Empfänger nicht ermitteln". Gestern versuchte ich es ein zweites Mal, in der Hoffnung ...
Der zweite zurückgekommenen Brief kam also in einen neuen, größeren Umschlag, wurde neu frankiert und mit einem entsprechenden Hinweis für den oder die zuständigen Deppen offenbar völlig überarbeiteten Postmenschen versehen, in der Hoffnung, dass sie sich etwas mehr Mühe geben.
.

.
Nur hier auf den Foto hab' ich die Straßenangabe durchgestrichen; KS mag keine unangemeldeten Besucher. Auf dem Original ist sie natürlich - wie immer - deutlich lesbar und korrekt drauf.