Q043: You have described your music
as totally "retro" and "rock n' roll". Do you see any
opposition between the power of old-fashioned rock and roll and your transcendent
ideas of trip music? How does this tie into your interest in electronic
music and musique concrète? Is the idea of being "progressive"
in music important to you at all?
You say that "All we want to do is play music that rocks and is cool", but think that a lot of very "normal" modern bands would say the same thing. What is the difference between them and AMT, in your opinion?
A043: For me Rock refers to all kinds
of cool music and the spirit that lodges therein. So, for me Xenakis and
Stockhausen and troubadour music are all Rock. On the other hand Aerosmith,
Nirvana and the Red Hot Chilli Peppers are not rock. They are just pop music,
causing no appreciable harm and no appreciable good.
Also, for me trip music does not mean the same as psychedelic rock. I refer to all kinds of music that can cause a trip in the wider sense. A simple explanation of what I mean by a trip is something that allows you to hear sounds that you do not usually hear, or that allows you to experience those dangerous frequencies that mount a violent assault upon your soul.
By progressive do you mean advanced or progressive rock? In my music I have no interest in newness. Newness is but a momentary state, after several seconds it is already old, so newness itself can be no standard for measuring the worth of music. I believe that my music is 'old-fashioned', so nothing can make it any older than it already is.
See my conception of rock as above. From that you should be able to work out that it is a very different definition to those who believe that Aerosmith and Nirvana are rock.