In my time at the Collegian, I’ve interviewed a lot of musicians. In the past few weeks, the number has shot up with profiles for last week’s
When I interview a musician, the first question I usually ask is, “How would you describe your music?” Even if I know the answer, it’s good to get it in the musician’s words, so I can use it in the article.
For some reason, as has been especially salient in the past few weeks as my number of interviews has skyrocketed, this question always catches people off guard. Honestly, if you get a call from a music reporter planning to write an article about you, how could this possibly be unexpected?
Seriously.
In very rare cases am I the first person to interview someone. In most cases, the subject has done interviews before, sometimes hundreds. They should have a stock answer by the time they talk to me. “Uh, we play, um, rock, I guess, high energy rock” isn’t good enough.
As a music critic, I describe what music sounds like on close to a weekly basis. I guess this means I have a “bias” towards others who can do the same, but I also figure that if you’re making music on a daily basis, you should be able to talk about it in a relatively confident manner.
First and foremost, music is meant to be listened to. But, as with any legitimate art form, there is merit in talking about it, too. When I review an album, I rarely spend more than a week listening to it. When someone is in a band—writing the music, rehearsing the music and playing the music live—there is a copious amount of time spent with the same material. If you can’t describe it, in concrete or abstract terms, you’re not paying attention.
