DEREK BAILEY

I think playing solo is a second rate activity, really. For me, playing is about playing with other people.

I wouldn't want to be ideological about it but I think of it as being the best way to approach this kind of playing. I don't think it works in other music, other kinds of playing.

Younger players in this music often turn out to be middle aged; it is not a young music.

Personally, I've found one of the more stimulating ways of playing in recent times has been to kind of move outside the free improvised area and work with people who are probably improvisers but they have a particular way of working.

I've always liked the effect of having somebody in there who hadn't the faintest idea what was going on.

I have always been attracted to the cottage industry side of this business.

Solo concerts are murder, I find; I don't like doing them.

In the absence of that, I am happy to play solo, but I don't think there is any comparison.

Playing music is not really susceptible to theory much. Circumstances affect it so much.

I think the blues is fine for blues players, but free blues has never made much sense to me.

I like duos with percussionists. I like the songs that percussionists sing.

For me, playing is about playing with other people.

I'm not much into current electronic stuff, what I think of as lounge electronics, mumbling electronics.

I am reactive.

Even if it is difficult playing with other people - sometimes it's great, sometimes it isn't, but that is kind of the point of it. It loses its point playing solo.

Nowadays, I really like playing in studios.

In fact it's quite gratifying for me to see some of the people who really objected to this method of working now being quite so profligate in their use of it.

For me, Company is still the best way for me to work.

Personally, I've found that the kind of thing that I like is going into somebody else's area and not playing their music but doing whatever I do in their area.

Free improvisation, in addition to being a highly skilled musical craft, is open to use by almost anyone-beginners, children, and non-musicians. The skill and intellect required is whatever is available. Its accessibility to the performer is, in fact, something which appears to offend both its supporters and detractors....And as regards method, the improvisor employs the oldest in music-making...Mankind's first musical performance couldn't have been anything other than a free improvisation.

Undeniably, the audience for improvisation, good or bad, active or passive, sympathetic or hostile, has a power that no other audience has. It can affect the creation of that which is being witnessed. And perhaps because of that possibility the audience for improvisation has a degree of intimacy with the music that is not achieved in any other situation.

If you could only play a record once, imagine the intensity you’d have to bring into the listening.

Diversity is its most consistent characteristic....The characteristics of freely improvised music are established only by the sonic-musical identity of the person or persons playing it.

Free improvisation, in addition to being a highly skilled musical craft, is open to use by almost anyone - beginners, children, and non-musicians.

Charlie Appleyard can be anybody; but Ive used him sometimes in chat pieces, and these are all chat pieces about the history of Charlie Appleyard.