WHITE CENTIPEDE NOISE PODCAST

[WCN]

WCN Podcast is back!

Out now: Episode 55 with James Light of WOUNDED SON / AGONAL LUST / FINDERS https://youtu.be/_7yGTlQqOZM

James Light makes industrial music under numerous monikers such as WOUNDED SON, MEATPACKER, and DRILLER. Aside from his solo work, he is member of the infamous duo AGONAL LUST, known for their suffocatingly morbid recordings and intensely violent performances. Here, James opens up about his life, touching on his traumatic upbringing, his struggles with mental health, and how all of these things funnel into the totality of his art. We also talk about his former label Finders, and his current imprint Packing Plant in this new episode of White Centipede Noise Podcast.

In the Patreon exclusive EXT. video, James talks about his personal relationship with the late great Keith Brewer of TAINT and MANIA, and shows me his top 5 industrial and power electronics releases of all time from his collection. James was also gracious enough to donate an exclusive digital EP from Agonal Lust side project CONTRAVENTION to the Maniac's Circle, which is now available there for download.

All that and more at: https://www.patreon.com/whitecentipedenoise

[FreakAnimalFinland]

Almost felt like something is missing during the break.. thinking what to listen on walks.
The polish salt factory that is mentioned, is very neat place to go to. For those who don't know it, check out:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1462mq2UxVY

In episode, at one point Oskar asks "why do we do this, why do we release noise?"

That question is interesting in a way that how should we approach the question? If it is suddenly blurted out to guy who has few seconds to think, it might not be obvious that we could ask exactly same question about most things in life. Even if you'd have answer for things like "why do you go to work", "why does car look like that" or thousand other questions. Usually we know sort of generic answer. Like former question trivial answer most likely: "to get money". That would already suggest in our lives we accepted certain guidelines how life should be lived and then just go along with the stream. A lot would be something build on formerly existing culture and behavior, and there barely is solid reason why one would collect "sneakers" or "baseball cards".

Interesting question in a way that it is slightly odd, and you don't really expect it would need.. "justification" so to say. Noise is one of the things that is less likely choices, but already for decades it is nevertheless existing option where people usually just end up and "why" can be quite strange question, although, I feel it can and ideally would be, manifestation to such question. Out of all things absolutely obvious, and things that are being culturally conditioned to be ways to go, for reason or another, someone prefers something else. Recognizes that there are options, preferences and alternative ways of living your life beyond the obvious. But to get very bottom of question seems almost futile. Why we release, relies on centuries of this urge and technological development that puts it on list of doable options? "Why" -question may have answer that it's part of urges that makes one human, that simply developed into unexpected direction? It feels that one could skip that level of questions that do not have answers, but proceed into why do you make or release in the way you do, as opposed to some other way. Things were one can certainly have conscious decision involved. Of course, we got to it. We get to hear some details about how Finders label was operating, how releases happened and so on.

We also get into self harm, mental issues, etc. It curiously ties into above mentioned. James mentioned that when the suicidal urges come, you should seek for help. He mentions that at some point it is not really you anymore. That is also curious notion. Thinking how big % of darker alternative culture may be born out of or related to mental issues or mere alienation. Question why one would be selling tapes of pedal distortion may appear less mystery, than why would one work entire waking times in job one doesn't like, to finance life that ain't really rewarding, sitting in traffic hours and hours, looking at scenery, and the population, that whole thing and - when you think of it - doesn't make sense whatsoever. Behind the wheel thinking Falling Down -film is just about to be reenacted. eh eh..   A lot of noise fellows may be able to say question why I make noise, is that at least I made a choice how to live my life, based on things I wanted to do, following instinct and taste, and not just drift in pre-programmed existence.

[Fistfuck Masonanie]

Up there as one of the top WCN interviews so far I think. Both Oskar and James pushed this along into very in-depth, and of course, personal discussions. Oskar controlled and guided the interview very well. Lots of meaningful insight into artistic intent. I appreciated a lot of the honesty about the different live shows and the desired reactions from the audience. Not all of the answers are typical or expected, but James' intent seems earnest and he is after a very illicit experience. The entire discussion is very direct, well thought out, and I enjoyed the unique perspectives.

A lot to digest and revisit.

I highly recommend everyone check out his release, The Sun – The Loss Of One, on Total Black from last year. Perfect example of only releasing things you would re-listen to multiple times. I've listened to this tape no less than 10 times since it came out and continue to throw it on every few weeks.

[Zeno Marx]

I highly recommend everyone check out his release, The Sun – The Loss Of One, on Total Black from last year. Perfect example of only releasing things you would re-listen to multiple times. I've listened to this tape no less than 10 times since it came out and continue to throw it on every few weeks.

Thanks for pointing this out.  Has an old and early feel to it, like something out of the 80s.  Experimentalism...thick with atmosphere.  The cover instantly nagged at me, like I'd seen it before.  Maybe color pangs from Big Country - The Crossing?

[WCN]

Out now! AFTERBLAST with Pat Yankee of PARANOID TIME / JOCKESSES on WCN TV!

Pat Yankee of harsh noise force PARANOID TIME joins me for a second time to talk about his pre-PT project JOCKESSES, which was recently reissued on WCN. We chat about that and a whole lot more on this episode of AFTERBLAST - a WCN TV series available through the White Centipede Noise Patreon.

Trailer: https://youtu.be/RTsLr7SP99k
Full episode: https://www.patreon.com/whitecentipedenoise

[WCN]

OUT NOW - Kevin Novak of T.E.F.
Kevin Novak is a master of cut up harsh noise hailing from Texas, USA. Active since the late 90s, he has worked closely with labels such as Hospital Productions, Pitch Phase, and Dada Drumming, the latter of which has released his most recent masterful albums Framework and Wrought. Kevin joined me to talk about what he does, how, and even a bit of the "why?," touching on his history, recording and gear techniques, and even his other creative outlet, painting. T.E.F. is a personal favorite project of mine, so this interview meant a lot to me.

https://youtu.be/k4uvv1BXJM8

In the Patreon exclusive EXT. video, Kevin goes into details about digital streaming, talks about his former label, making special handmade packaging, and reissues. Kevin has also graciously shared the audio file from his T.E.F release "Machination Of A Corner", released as a bizcard in 2002 on PACrec. Also, for those watching living, I'm giving away a copy of T.E.F. / A FAIL ASSOCIATION 7" (White Centipede Noise, 2019) with inverted colorway from the regular edition, riso printed by Tommy Carlsson. Edition 1 / 6 (the other 5 were packaged with the insane test pressing Texas flag edition) There will be a Patreon post as soon as the episode ends visible to all Heavy Sponsor / Noise Fiend Patreon supporters, and the first person to comment on the post wins this special 7".

All that and much more at https://www.patreon.com/whitecentipedenoise

[FreakAnimalFinland]

Previous afterblast, just checked out the free 15 mins with Pat. Always curious to listen the noise biz talk. Theories of up's and downs in genre. It would be curious to see people who were in multiple genres in USA, was there something similar visible in other music genres? Like hypothesis of economic crash being one cause of downfall, people running out of money, less noise tape batches and all that.. did it happen with other USA underground music? Punk, hc, metal...?
I don't think it happened at 2008'ish, but indeed, the more CD oriented metal scene probably went down, the small webstores & distros, etc? With metal, it seemed as if bigger places grew bigger, smaller got smaller. Same for bands. At one time it seemed as if everybody was selling the same, suddenly hierarchy was back. No name copycat bands would no longer move 1000 discs, like they could some years earlier. It is possible this same is with noise. When level of saturation reaches certain point, it needs to be some quite extraordinary stuff, and big batch that feel (regardless is it or not) more of the same just isn't enough. Same may be for zine. Even podcast! You got one first big major issue, long a waited and stirs discussion. Then, like discussed in this episode, suddenly some folks will be thinking not again another noise t-shirt noise guys circle jerk! haha. My estimation is, that regardless is there visible and loud response.  How big crowd is enough, is of course question one can think from their own perspective.

I can't remember did they talk about LOUD LOUDER LOUDEST radioshow in the former podcast. And no idea if it came out on full episode? About 10 years ago, almost 100 two hour harsh noise radio-mixes came out. Have I listened them all? Hell no! But every episode I did, basically ruled. They were more like all-on-ten mixes of stuff, crossfading and bleeding into eachother. Mixer blasted at all red, compressing hell out of already loud harsh noise. Some may get burned out on doing weekly shows thinking only 10.. 20.. 30.. 40 occasionally 100 people listened to them. Even less in actual radio-live situation. I feel this just kind of waits to be re-discovered. Not sure if its illusion, but it is possible that when idea of noise mix-tapes, purely digital stream releases, and all that is probably more accepted than decade ago (don't know, just gut feeling), perhaps now more than dozen people could be into checking out things like:
https://www.mixcloud.com/mankdevo/



T.E.F., listened couple of his CD's last week. Box from Dada Drumming arrived, and I liked what I heard! TEF is certainly among very best of cut up harsh noise, and all his talk about how he actually makes it, perhaps explains why it is as good as it is.
One greatest qualities is that it is as much cut-up noise as it is just vivid high energy harsh noise.

[WCN]

Out now! AFTERBLAST with Andy Bolus of EVIL MOISTURE!

Lovely long follow up chat to our first interview, this time on the eve of Andy's trip to the USA to play Summer Scum Festival in NYC.

https://www.patreon.com/whitecentipedenoise

[FreakAnimalFinland]

Afterblast is pretty good idea. Now that I got to see the rest of Pat Yankee, I would guess that there is something in first getting discussion going... and it seem inevitable that not matter how long episode may have been recorded, at least the target of interview will be "god damn! I should have clarified that..." .  Last weekend happened to give long interview for Finn podcast, which doesn't touch noise too deep though, but regardless of some hours of length, feeling is more of "I should have talked about...".  Why afterblast recorded fairly soon after the first episode could be very good way to get things deeper. Not only artists knows what he probably did not talk about that should have, but perhaps more audience questions - if there are.

One question that is sort of personal, but it comes up even in afterblast, Pat mentions that at some point he kind of drifted away from noise. I assume about 10 years ago when he stopped LLL, stopped labels, etc..  Just mentioning that other things were happening. It comes fairly clear, it can be summed into "life happened". Many times those active in their youth, suddenly becomes less active and turns out when you got family with young kids, the priorities may have to be adjusted. Smoking weed and fooling around with tape edits may not feel like top priority when you got kids that need attention or challenging work that needs to be dealt with?

At least, it seems to be that "I got interested again", often appears to correlate with getting some free time (lets say covid restrictions as example) or a bit older guys, who suddenly make come back into recording or touring, simply because their personal situation changed. To me, at least, it appears as if these things would happen in clusters. People of certain generation of noise, tend to behave like people usually do, so in certain age it will be house, wife, kids and the real work and people being roughly same generation sudden wave of people dropping out can be sometimes simply that life got on the way of noise, hah..   Now that noise has no longer been "youth culture" per se, it may be different?

[FreakAnimalFinland]

One thing got to add, the talk about "new methods of making noise" is kind of curious. I feel this has been discussed, but like discussions about the need of pushing noise to new direction. Notions of old guys back in the day often being on top of the technological development, as opposed to now methods or gear being.. kind of vintage. Amps,
guitar pedals, synths, etc   Necessity to push noise somewhere else than guys with pedals churning harsh walls on compact cassette...
It feels kind of odd, since I don't think it requires anything else expanding than horizon what one wants to listen to and check out. If not wanting yet another C-30 of pedal noise artists, then one may has to look other direction? As there certainly can't be shortage of computer generated noise, or other new gear.

It could be worth discussion if the obvious development and diversity of noise, methods, gear and ways of releasing or experiencing is merely clouded by outcome of tight curation based on subgenre mentality? Like, wanting something new, but if the new is not the same, it gets rejected? To push something just a notch into another direction keeps it accepted as part of harsh noise, yet then isn't anything dramatically different?

[Commander15]

One thing got to add, the talk about "new methods of making noise" is kind of curious. I feel this has been discussed, but like discussions about the need of pushing noise to new direction. Notions of old guys back in the day often being on top of the technological development, as opposed to now methods or gear being.. kind of vintage. Amps,
guitar pedals, synths, etc   Necessity to push noise somewhere else than guys with pedals churning harsh walls on compact cassette...
It feels kind of odd, since I don't think it requires anything else expanding than horizon what one wants to listen to and check out. If not wanting yet another C-30 of pedal noise artists, then one may has to look other direction? As there certainly can't be shortage of computer generated noise, or other new gear.

It could be worth discussion if the obvious development and diversity of noise, methods, gear and ways of releasing or experiencing is merely clouded by outcome of tight curation based on subgenre mentality? Like, wanting something new, but if the new is not the same, it gets rejected? To push something just a notch into another direction keeps it accepted as part of harsh noise, yet then isn't anything dramatically different?

It never ceases to baffle me that this same "new methods required"-angle still pops up in discussions related to noise / experimental, especially when gear is discussed.

To my mind it often contains this maybe unconscious materialistic insinuation that technology is the main driving force behind experimental expression, that persona or the vision behind the sound is secondary. It's not like oil painting technique itself is holding back the artist, it's the lack of skills, imagination and some sort of vision that is the real obstacle. It is possible to create almost infinite amount of sounds, noises and timbres with already existing set of "noise tools" when combined with different spaces, amplification sources, recording methods and post-production tools. It just needs experimenting a lot, listening and some skills and time.

And in this time and age you could definitely find noise artists that do not use contact mic into DOD Death Metal plugged straight into four-trackers input. I understand that people get stuck in their own past preferences, get jaded and cynical about things, that's what life can do to you. But to generalize your own irks and peeves to level of whole artform itself seems a bit stupid to me. It sure is phenomenon in i.e classic rock, only in reactionary form, where people are moaning about the death of rock and electric guitar and the only flagbearer for true rock spirit is either some dipshit Bonamassa or some lukewarm teenage Led Zeppelin jukebox from States.

[Andrew McIntosh]

It could be worth discussion if the obvious development and diversity of noise, methods, gear and ways of releasing or experiencing is merely clouded by outcome of tight curation based on subgenre mentality? Like, wanting something new, but if the new is not the same, it gets rejected? To push something just a notch into another direction keeps it accepted as part of harsh noise, yet then isn't anything dramatically different?

It sure feels that way. The demands of the market, I think. No risk taking, just preferring to keep it safe because it seems to work all the time. Put out another Marvel superhero movie, put out another Noise tape that's "about" sexual murders with a photocopied, collaged image cover - it's the same thing. The slightest twist on the formula, play it up in the advertising, it seems to work so far.

[WCN]

One thing got to add, the talk about "new methods of making noise" is kind of curious. I feel this has been discussed, but like discussions about the need of pushing noise to new direction. Notions of old guys back in the day often being on top of the technological development, as opposed to now methods or gear being.. kind of vintage. Amps,
guitar pedals, synths, etc   Necessity to push noise somewhere else than guys with pedals churning harsh walls on compact cassette...
It feels kind of odd, since I don't think it requires anything else expanding than horizon what one wants to listen to and check out. If not wanting yet another C-30 of pedal noise artists, then one may has to look other direction? As there certainly can't be shortage of computer generated noise, or other new gear.

It could be worth discussion if the obvious development and diversity of noise, methods, gear and ways of releasing or experiencing is merely clouded by outcome of tight curation based on subgenre mentality? Like, wanting something new, but if the new is not the same, it gets rejected? To push something just a notch into another direction keeps it accepted as part of harsh noise, yet then isn't anything dramatically different?

It never ceases to baffle me that this same "new methods required"-angle still pops up in discussions related to noise / experimental, especially when gear is discussed.

To my mind it often contains this maybe unconscious materialistic insinuation that technology is the main driving force behind experimental expression, that persona or the vision behind the sound is secondary. It's not like oil painting technique itself is holding back the artist, it's the lack of skills, imagination and some sort of vision that is the real obstacle. It is possible to create almost infinite amount of sounds, noises and timbres with already existing set of "noise tools" when combined with different spaces, amplification sources, recording methods and post-production tools. It just needs experimenting a lot, listening and some skills and time.

And in this time and age you could definitely find noise artists that do not use contact mic into DOD Death Metal plugged straight into four-trackers input. I understand that people get stuck in their own past preferences, get jaded and cynical about things, that's what life can do to you. But to generalize your own irks and peeves to level of whole artform itself seems a bit stupid to me. It sure is phenomenon in i.e classic rock, only in reactionary form, where people are moaning about the death of rock and electric guitar and the only flagbearer for true rock spirit is either some dipshit Bonamassa or some lukewarm teenage Led Zeppelin jukebox from States.

The context of this conversation was new methods for creating HARSH noise in its precise sense, whatever that may be, not general experimental sound. I can’t provide an exact definition of that that is, but as a base definition I might personally say something like it is simply violent, loud, textured sound comprised of pure noise.

I do not believe the existing set of harsh noise tools can create an infinite amount of timbres, noises and sounds. That’s just my point, I believe it is finite and quite physically limited, and that the tools predetermine the artistic output in a big way. If we are talking about the existing noise tools, I’d say around 90% of harsh noise artists’s work is based around using a fairly narrow range, maybe 10-20, of acoustic or electronic source distorted and filtered through analog circuits, or digital methods that simulate analog circuits. I have to believe there are powerful sounds that satisfy the essence of HARSH noise that are rarely achieved, or possibly have never been achieved, that we might not even be able to imagine, because they don’t occur when using the existing set of noise tools.

It is as if a visual artist had a specific INTENT to convey (i.e. harsh noise) but was limiting themselves to use only oil painting to achieve it. At some point they might decide - “for what I want to convey, I could possibly do it better and more effectively with watercolors, or a mixed media collage, or a 3D projection, etc.” I’m not arguing that there might not be a seemingly infinite creative variations within the existing framework, but at the end of the day, they will always be defined by its tools and medium, which might not have any inherent defining connection to the intent. If we imagine that harsh noise is a certain type of audio intent beyond the sound of analog distortion, then the current predominant tools might become like a fraction of what could be used to achieve this.

[Commander15]

One thing got to add, the talk about "new methods of making noise" is kind of curious. I feel this has been discussed, but like discussions about the need of pushing noise to new direction. Notions of old guys back in the day often being on top of the technological development, as opposed to now methods or gear being.. kind of vintage. Amps,
guitar pedals, synths, etc   Necessity to push noise somewhere else than guys with pedals churning harsh walls on compact cassette...
It feels kind of odd, since I don't think it requires anything else expanding than horizon what one wants to listen to and check out. If not wanting yet another C-30 of pedal noise artists, then one may has to look other direction? As there certainly can't be shortage of computer generated noise, or other new gear.

It could be worth discussion if the obvious development and diversity of noise, methods, gear and ways of releasing or experiencing is merely clouded by outcome of tight curation based on subgenre mentality? Like, wanting something new, but if the new is not the same, it gets rejected? To push something just a notch into another direction keeps it accepted as part of harsh noise, yet then isn't anything dramatically different?

It never ceases to baffle me that this same "new methods required"-angle still pops up in discussions related to noise / experimental, especially when gear is discussed.

To my mind it often contains this maybe unconscious materialistic insinuation that technology is the main driving force behind experimental expression, that persona or the vision behind the sound is secondary. It's not like oil painting technique itself is holding back the artist, it's the lack of skills, imagination and some sort of vision that is the real obstacle. It is possible to create almost infinite amount of sounds, noises and timbres with already existing set of "noise tools" when combined with different spaces, amplification sources, recording methods and post-production tools. It just needs experimenting a lot, listening and some skills and time.

And in this time and age you could definitely find noise artists that do not use contact mic into DOD Death Metal plugged straight into four-trackers input. I understand that people get stuck in their own past preferences, get jaded and cynical about things, that's what life can do to you. But to generalize your own irks and peeves to level of whole artform itself seems a bit stupid to me. It sure is phenomenon in i.e classic rock, only in reactionary form, where people are moaning about the death of rock and electric guitar and the only flagbearer for true rock spirit is either some dipshit Bonamassa or some lukewarm teenage Led Zeppelin jukebox from States.

The context of this conversation was new methods for creating HARSH noise in its precise sense, whatever that may be, not general experimental sound. I can't provide an exact definition of that that is, but as a base definition I might personally say something like it is simply violent, loud, textured sound comprised of pure noise.

I do not believe the existing set of harsh noise tools can create an infinite amount of timbres, noises and sounds. That's just my point, I believe it is finite and quite physically limited, and that the tools predetermine the artistic output in a big way. If we are talking about the existing noise tools, I'd say around 90% of harsh noise artists's work is based around using an acoustic or electronic source distorted and filtered through analog circuits, or digital methods that simulate analog circuits. I have to believe there are powerful sounds that satisfy the essence of HARSH noise that are rarely achieved, or possibly have never been achieved, that we might not even be able to imagine, because they don't occur when using the existing set of noise tools.

It is as if a visual artist had a specific INTENT to convey (i.e. harsh noise) but was limiting themselves to use only oil painting to achieve it. At some point they might decide - "for what I want to convey, I could possibly do it better and more effectively with watercolors, or a mixed media collage, or a 3D projection, etc." I'm not arguing that there might not be a seemingly infinite creative variations within the existing framework, but at the end of the day, they will always be defined by its tools and medium, which might not have any inherent defining connection to the intent. If we imagine that harsh noise is a certain type of audio intent beyond the sound of analog distortion, then the current predominant tools might become like a fraction of what could be used to achieve this.

I must admit that i didn't know the actual context was, i was just simply replying to FreakAnimalFinland's message, thank you for clarifying that. I'll come back to this subject with an answer when i have some free time on my disposal.

[FreakAnimalFinland]

The context of this conversation was new methods for creating HARSH noise in its precise sense, whatever that may be, not general experimental sound. I can't provide an exact definition of that that is, but as a base definition I might personally say something like it is simply violent, loud, textured sound comprised of pure noise.

Oh yes, I feel this is kind of discussion of different "schools" of noise, what really constitutes as noise or harsh noise.

If we absolutely insist, that harsh noise must be: pure distortion - well, I guess in that sense we set so narrow limit to harsh noise that it can only be: pure distortion. How that square wave of harsh distortion can be achieved, in the end, I would say there are very little room for advancement.

I would rather ask same question that I have asked any times before, is the distortion the qualification of NOISE and harsh noise? I am not talking about experimental music as a whole. I am indeed, talking of Noise with capital N. Based on my own experience, where distortion and "harshness" may be equal to soothing bubble bath. That the noisiness, disorienting, challenging, confusing, surprising, unpleasant, sense of LOUDNESS, sense of decay, sense of damage, sense of brokenness, sense of disorganized chaos, and so forth, are also qualities of noise. Or more precisely HARSH noise. If some sound has only distortion, only texture, how harsh it is compared to something that has unexpected broken damage, decay, loudness (that is not depending on volume), and other qualities?

It feels odd, that if we'd want something new, and then limit the possibility of that required new into frame where nothing new could happen. Other than what method of distortion we will apply into sounds we have. I feel it is counterproductive to harsh noise, and neither it is harsh noise I personally know of. I'd rather say this is the new noise. The late 2010's noise. New noise that thinks amount of static distortion is what defines its harshness, while you could grab something like Organum/TNB, Gerogerigege, S&Q (as easy examples we all know), who include the other qualities of harsh (literal definition: unpleasantly rough or jarring to the senses, and furthermore, rough being literally "irregular surface; not smooth or level").

I am fully aware, this may be partly matter of semantics. But, that said, I am not talking about noise as "experimental music", but noise as sound that is not synonymous with sound you find from maximum settings of distortion pedal.