Part 1
Part 2
#Bent Knee #progressive rock #art rock #industrial #baroque pop #avant-garde #music video
New music rarely can surprise today but, once in a while, artists emerge whose works are as accessible as they’re intellectual, and it doesn’t take any effort to be charmed and mesmerized by such creators. Boston’s Bent Knee belong to this category: unlike many of their perceivably alternative peers, the sextet’s exploration of ethereal and noisy extremes isn’t “for the sake of it” kind of exercise, just because the result feels so organic – never more so, perhaps, than on the band’s latest album, their third full-length studio offering. There are almost-hits on “Say So”; the audience only has to embrace the record. Too bad, then, Bent Knee sometimes play to a very limited, if utterly captivated, crowd. Still, one may sense it’s just a matter of time before they hit the big time. While it’s happening, it’s tempting to tap into the ensemble’s collective conscious; that’s why, before the group’s Toronto gig, this scribe sat on a near-venue lawn with guitarist Ben Levin, singer-keyboardist Courtney Swain, bassist Jessica Kion and violin player Chris Baum for an engaging conversation.
– Guys, you are clearly getting traction now. Is it because the band are backed by a label now or vice versa: you got a record deal because audiences started paying attention?
Ben: Having the label deal has definitely helped us get traction because it’s enabled us to reach a new audience and gave as a sort of a seal: “Hey, these people are working hard and they’re serious!” The listeners know that Cuneiform wouldn’t sign bands that aren’t very active and trying to make the best music they can as much as they can. In terms of what came first – the traction from Cuneiform or us getting traction and then the deal with Cuneiform – it’s a mix of both, because we’d just finished a three-month tour last summer before Cuneiform approached us, and I think just the fact that we had been out for so long – it was our tenth tour or something – and that we already worked so much was important for the label in their decision to sign us.
– So having Cuneiform backing you gives you validation in the listener’s eyes?
Everyone (at the same time): Absolutely!
Ben: I don’t think labels in general will be that important or around much longer because things are just changing so much that the stuff that makes money in music is more based around live performance now, so unless labels start to play a bigger role in that economic stream… There’s not enough money coming in from recordings themselves, and a big part of why a label is useful these days is that seal of approval. But a lot of people still hold on to the idea that labels are the tastemakers and doorkeepers.
– But from a purely financial standpoint, would it be easier for you to operate now?
Chris: Yes and no. With Cuneiform, because of how much we tour, we’re actually our label’s bigger customers as we wind up purchasing our own records from them, wholesale, and then go out and sell the CDs at shows. It’s hard to say because we’re gaining a larger audience thanks to Cuneiform and, like we’ve been saying, the seal of approval has also helped us validate claims and propel our music forward, but at the same time, we’re making less per record.
Ben: That they do all that fulfillment, that’s huge. While we’re out on the road, we can’t be sending our records out to people who buy them; that’s something the label does that’s useful.
– The music that you play and that pulls people to the band is characterized as “avant-garde pop”; but what’s so avant-garde about it in your eyes?
Courtney: There’s a lot of experimentation in how we’re putting together different forms of the song, but I guess it’s a mindset more than a product. We’re most interested in creating something new: that’s the whole idea of being “avant.” There is a genre and a market for music right now where people are essentially creating the same thing to fill the specific needs of filling a silence in a cafe, people dancing; essentially, commercial music. And I think the whole idea of being avant is that we’re trying to create what’s new. Certainly, if we wanted to be imitative it could be imitative as a byproduct, but we’re trying to create something that’s more than just a regurgitation of what’s happened before.
– Do you have to somewhat restrain your experimentation to retain a pop aspect?
Jessica: I don’t think so. We’re going as far as we would like to go, and that’s both as weird as we get and as normal and acceptable as we get. Every new song kind of steers the ship in a slightly different direction with regards to genre or techniques that we’re tying together into our world, and we are always going in a new place.
Chris: Basically every genre label that has been given to Bent Knee has not been coming from us. We’re not composing music to fit into any kind of genre box; we’re composing music that we like, and the only barrier for a song entry into the repertoire is that all of us in the band have to really love it and be behind it. (“Yeah” and nods from everybody.) We’ve never writing to make sure we’re in the pop box or the experimental box; we’re just writing music that we really would like to exist in the world, and then, after the fact, it gets labelled in a box as we have to figure out where to send it off to, but that’s not at all a part of our writing process, this consideration of genre.
– Many of your pieces are comprised of a few sections, and I think you could easily make a separate song out of each of those. How hard it is to construct such a piece, and how do you decide where to stop and not add or subtract anything from it?
Chris: With every detail you add to a song you’re either helping to create momentum or you’re destroying momentum, and I think a good song carries you through the whole way, so throughout the whole song you’re engaged as a listener, and it takes you on a journey to the end. When we’re creating sections, we’re trying to further the story and push the momentum forward, so sometimes if things are very secular and the same thing is happening over and over again, it can be helpful to make a sudden change to very new territory, and that’s why we can sometimes fit maybe two songs into one of ours. But then, when we draw the line, we’re not going any further and not adding any more sections because, eventually, if you keep adding too much stuff you blur the whole experience so it doesn’t feel like a journey anymore – it feels like you’re lost in the abyss. That’s how we gauge it – is this furthering the momentum of the song or is it hurting it? – and then we consider what to add.
– Is your Berklee background helpful in this process or is it restricting creativity?
Jessica: When I studied songwriting at Berklee, we learned a lot of songs with really strict forms, and so I feel, after writing songs at Berklee, I always have what a song should be according to people who study songs in the background. But when we’re writing in a rehearsal, I don’t think it changes how we feel about the song we’re working on. Maybe as a principle we prefer not taking to a normal musical form like A-B-A-B-B, B, B, B forever (laughs) which is very popular right now. In general, we all like to have more sections than just A and B, or at least have a reason why the song winds up being whatever it becomes.
– But isn’t a simplification to call your composition “a song”?
Ben: The quote I like to call on all the time is: “Lyrics make you think a thought. Music makes you feel a feeling. Songs make you feel thoughts”. Our goal is to make you feel the thoughts, so calling it “a song” is appropriate as long as there are lyrics.
Chris: If there are lyrics and the piece itself holds its own outside of a larger structure, that’s the only requirement I see for a song.
– Did it take you long to learn to collectively construct a song? I feel seams on your debut album but sections flow into one another seamlessly now.
Chris: It’s getting quicker. When we first started doing this, having six people with creative ideas and strong opinions and different backgrounds in the same room, there used to be a lot of butting of heads, so especially with “Shiny Eyed Babies” when we were hashing all that out, it was like pulling teeth because we couldn’t all come to agreement on anything, but we were committed to this idea that everyone needed to agree on everything, so it took a very long time to actually finish that record and turn it in. But since that process happened and we’re all very happy with the outcome, things have gotten much quicker just because we trust each other a lot more and we can validate each other’s ideas. So, it’s getting faster but it still takes a while, and part of our process is: someone will bring in a core of a song and then we all hammer away at it, and once it’s in a playable format we play it out, and we play it in front of an audience to see how it feels to us and see how the audience reacts, and then we take it back to the workshop and continue working out the kinks. Then we get it to the studio, and the last step of our writing process is sitting down with it and continue to reshape it so it takes on its final recorded form.
– Going from quiet to loud section and back again is an assault on the senses. Is it vital for you – especially from the vocal perspective?
Courtney: Is moving dynamically necessary? Oooh, it’s a good question. I was talking before about how we want to do something new, and that idea applies to what we do ourselves, but at a certain point it’s really hard not to repeat yourself, and one thing that we do repeat or we do rely on is that everyone’s playing loud, because there’s a certain visceral feeling to just being hit with that wash, that assault on the senses as you described it – there is something to that. But we’re trying to keep it up there and not use it too much, so that when we do use it it’s because we want to conjure a really intense feeling in a listener, but also because we want to express something within us. Most of the music we write is based on something that happened in our lives, although sometimes we write it like a story that we made up, but even if it’s someone else’s experience that we’re all performing, it’s because we all think of ourselves as introspective people and we need that relief of playing loud and playing hard: it’s just the way that we cope with life… at least I’m speaking for myself. When we get back from touring and stop playing out for a while, we’re emotionally constipated in a way. I think I’m more of a performer than a writer and, for example, Ben’s more of a writer than a performer; but my medium – one that I’m most connected with – is performing in front of people. So in that sense assault on the senses is sort of a need.
Jessica: Just to add to that, I think that a cathartic experience for us, and for the audience more importantly, is playing really loud and then playing really soft or stopping. It’s something that a lot people don’t expect. It’s a very interesting thing to do to an audience, because I feel like a lot of dynamics are flattened with a lot of bands who play loud or soft for their entire performance. But to abruptly go from really loud to really soft is magical!
– So you consciously put an element of surprise into every song, right?
Courtney: That is a byproduct of our method. Sometimes we’re being surprising on purpose, but sometimes it’s just what we feel the songs need, and it might be surprising but it does happen. (Laughs.)
– Is there also an element of synesthesia in the thing that you do?
Ben: There is definitely a sense of imagery that we all get from what we hear in some form or another, but since none of us has synesthesia full-on, and none of us agrees, “Hey, let’s make music that’s the color red!” or “Let’s make music that reminds me of water!” we don’t go and do that, so I don’t know if it translates very strongly in that way.
– Orchestral scope of your pieces like “Little Specks Of Calcium”: do you use it for the best sonic expression or for theatrical presentation?
Ben: For sonic expression, for sure: we’re looking for a sound first and foremost. An original electronic version of “Little Specks Of Calcium” that existed before the band worked on it was not dynamic; it was pretty flat – it was kind of neat flat! But when we started playing it didn’t really feel great; it was part of where we got that exploding sound from, it worked live – it was working.
– Would you like to work with a real orchestra at some point?
All at once (laughing): Yeah. Yes. Sure. It would be awesome.
Ben: I’m scared of brass in arrangements, but yeah, bring it on, bring an orchestra.
Jessica (laughing): Tell them!
Ben: Tell them to give us an orchestra! (Everybody laughs.)
Chris: We’ll make good use of it.
From: https://dmme.net/interviews/interview-with-bent-knee
– Guys, you are clearly getting traction now. Is it because the band are backed by a label now or vice versa: you got a record deal because audiences started paying attention?
Ben: Having the label deal has definitely helped us get traction because it’s enabled us to reach a new audience and gave as a sort of a seal: “Hey, these people are working hard and they’re serious!” The listeners know that Cuneiform wouldn’t sign bands that aren’t very active and trying to make the best music they can as much as they can. In terms of what came first – the traction from Cuneiform or us getting traction and then the deal with Cuneiform – it’s a mix of both, because we’d just finished a three-month tour last summer before Cuneiform approached us, and I think just the fact that we had been out for so long – it was our tenth tour or something – and that we already worked so much was important for the label in their decision to sign us.
– So having Cuneiform backing you gives you validation in the listener’s eyes?
Everyone (at the same time): Absolutely!
Ben: I don’t think labels in general will be that important or around much longer because things are just changing so much that the stuff that makes money in music is more based around live performance now, so unless labels start to play a bigger role in that economic stream… There’s not enough money coming in from recordings themselves, and a big part of why a label is useful these days is that seal of approval. But a lot of people still hold on to the idea that labels are the tastemakers and doorkeepers.
– But from a purely financial standpoint, would it be easier for you to operate now?
Chris: Yes and no. With Cuneiform, because of how much we tour, we’re actually our label’s bigger customers as we wind up purchasing our own records from them, wholesale, and then go out and sell the CDs at shows. It’s hard to say because we’re gaining a larger audience thanks to Cuneiform and, like we’ve been saying, the seal of approval has also helped us validate claims and propel our music forward, but at the same time, we’re making less per record.
Ben: That they do all that fulfillment, that’s huge. While we’re out on the road, we can’t be sending our records out to people who buy them; that’s something the label does that’s useful.
– The music that you play and that pulls people to the band is characterized as “avant-garde pop”; but what’s so avant-garde about it in your eyes?
Courtney: There’s a lot of experimentation in how we’re putting together different forms of the song, but I guess it’s a mindset more than a product. We’re most interested in creating something new: that’s the whole idea of being “avant.” There is a genre and a market for music right now where people are essentially creating the same thing to fill the specific needs of filling a silence in a cafe, people dancing; essentially, commercial music. And I think the whole idea of being avant is that we’re trying to create what’s new. Certainly, if we wanted to be imitative it could be imitative as a byproduct, but we’re trying to create something that’s more than just a regurgitation of what’s happened before.
– Do you have to somewhat restrain your experimentation to retain a pop aspect?
Jessica: I don’t think so. We’re going as far as we would like to go, and that’s both as weird as we get and as normal and acceptable as we get. Every new song kind of steers the ship in a slightly different direction with regards to genre or techniques that we’re tying together into our world, and we are always going in a new place.
Chris: Basically every genre label that has been given to Bent Knee has not been coming from us. We’re not composing music to fit into any kind of genre box; we’re composing music that we like, and the only barrier for a song entry into the repertoire is that all of us in the band have to really love it and be behind it. (“Yeah” and nods from everybody.) We’ve never writing to make sure we’re in the pop box or the experimental box; we’re just writing music that we really would like to exist in the world, and then, after the fact, it gets labelled in a box as we have to figure out where to send it off to, but that’s not at all a part of our writing process, this consideration of genre.
– Many of your pieces are comprised of a few sections, and I think you could easily make a separate song out of each of those. How hard it is to construct such a piece, and how do you decide where to stop and not add or subtract anything from it?
Chris: With every detail you add to a song you’re either helping to create momentum or you’re destroying momentum, and I think a good song carries you through the whole way, so throughout the whole song you’re engaged as a listener, and it takes you on a journey to the end. When we’re creating sections, we’re trying to further the story and push the momentum forward, so sometimes if things are very secular and the same thing is happening over and over again, it can be helpful to make a sudden change to very new territory, and that’s why we can sometimes fit maybe two songs into one of ours. But then, when we draw the line, we’re not going any further and not adding any more sections because, eventually, if you keep adding too much stuff you blur the whole experience so it doesn’t feel like a journey anymore – it feels like you’re lost in the abyss. That’s how we gauge it – is this furthering the momentum of the song or is it hurting it? – and then we consider what to add.
– Is your Berklee background helpful in this process or is it restricting creativity?
Jessica: When I studied songwriting at Berklee, we learned a lot of songs with really strict forms, and so I feel, after writing songs at Berklee, I always have what a song should be according to people who study songs in the background. But when we’re writing in a rehearsal, I don’t think it changes how we feel about the song we’re working on. Maybe as a principle we prefer not taking to a normal musical form like A-B-A-B-B, B, B, B forever (laughs) which is very popular right now. In general, we all like to have more sections than just A and B, or at least have a reason why the song winds up being whatever it becomes.
– But isn’t a simplification to call your composition “a song”?
Ben: The quote I like to call on all the time is: “Lyrics make you think a thought. Music makes you feel a feeling. Songs make you feel thoughts”. Our goal is to make you feel the thoughts, so calling it “a song” is appropriate as long as there are lyrics.
Chris: If there are lyrics and the piece itself holds its own outside of a larger structure, that’s the only requirement I see for a song.
– Did it take you long to learn to collectively construct a song? I feel seams on your debut album but sections flow into one another seamlessly now.
Chris: It’s getting quicker. When we first started doing this, having six people with creative ideas and strong opinions and different backgrounds in the same room, there used to be a lot of butting of heads, so especially with “Shiny Eyed Babies” when we were hashing all that out, it was like pulling teeth because we couldn’t all come to agreement on anything, but we were committed to this idea that everyone needed to agree on everything, so it took a very long time to actually finish that record and turn it in. But since that process happened and we’re all very happy with the outcome, things have gotten much quicker just because we trust each other a lot more and we can validate each other’s ideas. So, it’s getting faster but it still takes a while, and part of our process is: someone will bring in a core of a song and then we all hammer away at it, and once it’s in a playable format we play it out, and we play it in front of an audience to see how it feels to us and see how the audience reacts, and then we take it back to the workshop and continue working out the kinks. Then we get it to the studio, and the last step of our writing process is sitting down with it and continue to reshape it so it takes on its final recorded form.
– Going from quiet to loud section and back again is an assault on the senses. Is it vital for you – especially from the vocal perspective?
Courtney: Is moving dynamically necessary? Oooh, it’s a good question. I was talking before about how we want to do something new, and that idea applies to what we do ourselves, but at a certain point it’s really hard not to repeat yourself, and one thing that we do repeat or we do rely on is that everyone’s playing loud, because there’s a certain visceral feeling to just being hit with that wash, that assault on the senses as you described it – there is something to that. But we’re trying to keep it up there and not use it too much, so that when we do use it it’s because we want to conjure a really intense feeling in a listener, but also because we want to express something within us. Most of the music we write is based on something that happened in our lives, although sometimes we write it like a story that we made up, but even if it’s someone else’s experience that we’re all performing, it’s because we all think of ourselves as introspective people and we need that relief of playing loud and playing hard: it’s just the way that we cope with life… at least I’m speaking for myself. When we get back from touring and stop playing out for a while, we’re emotionally constipated in a way. I think I’m more of a performer than a writer and, for example, Ben’s more of a writer than a performer; but my medium – one that I’m most connected with – is performing in front of people. So in that sense assault on the senses is sort of a need.
Jessica: Just to add to that, I think that a cathartic experience for us, and for the audience more importantly, is playing really loud and then playing really soft or stopping. It’s something that a lot people don’t expect. It’s a very interesting thing to do to an audience, because I feel like a lot of dynamics are flattened with a lot of bands who play loud or soft for their entire performance. But to abruptly go from really loud to really soft is magical!
– So you consciously put an element of surprise into every song, right?
Courtney: That is a byproduct of our method. Sometimes we’re being surprising on purpose, but sometimes it’s just what we feel the songs need, and it might be surprising but it does happen. (Laughs.)
– Is there also an element of synesthesia in the thing that you do?
Ben: There is definitely a sense of imagery that we all get from what we hear in some form or another, but since none of us has synesthesia full-on, and none of us agrees, “Hey, let’s make music that’s the color red!” or “Let’s make music that reminds me of water!” we don’t go and do that, so I don’t know if it translates very strongly in that way.
– Orchestral scope of your pieces like “Little Specks Of Calcium”: do you use it for the best sonic expression or for theatrical presentation?
Ben: For sonic expression, for sure: we’re looking for a sound first and foremost. An original electronic version of “Little Specks Of Calcium” that existed before the band worked on it was not dynamic; it was pretty flat – it was kind of neat flat! But when we started playing it didn’t really feel great; it was part of where we got that exploding sound from, it worked live – it was working.
– Would you like to work with a real orchestra at some point?
All at once (laughing): Yeah. Yes. Sure. It would be awesome.
Ben: I’m scared of brass in arrangements, but yeah, bring it on, bring an orchestra.
Jessica (laughing): Tell them!
Ben: Tell them to give us an orchestra! (Everybody laughs.)
Chris: We’ll make good use of it.
From: https://dmme.net/interviews/interview-with-bent-knee
