If you listen to really deep ambient records that don't move too much, very still records, long after those records are finished, you might find yourself listening for hours to the sound of the room.
Nothing was a style first. Everything started as an idea. A guy did something with an idea. Someone copied him. Some copied all of them and it became trendy and then it became a style.
In all the music that deals with experimental repetition, drum and bass, dub, various kinds of house music, there's always been a quality of atmosphere and ambience.
What I'm dealing with is sound. I don't pretend to be dealing with music. I'm just dealing with sound elements, textures and sounds.
People who play conventional music are threatened by electronica and don't consider it to be as valuable as what they do.
Records are just moments of achievement. They're like receipts for work done. Time goes on and people keep playing music.
The atmosphere defines the environment of sound.
Sound comes out of a life experience.
Miles Davis fully embraced possibilities and delved into it. He was criticized heavily from the jazz side. He was supposed to be part of a tradition, but he didn't consider himself part of a tradition.
I think if you look at exactly where you are, you can't really focus without looking back and forward at the same time.
I think everything's experimental whether you like it or not. I think that people who do generic pop are experimenting with cliches. It's no less than I am experimenting with noise or unknown music - until you say, 'This is my song, or this is my composition' - it's all experimental, whether you like it or not.
I put projects together. I put people together.
I've never used ethnic music as decoration for profit.
I don't think technology is viable unless the person applying it has something to say.
Engineering producers who don't play and have technology as a background may be the reason why there's a lot of cold non-musical music, for lack of a better description.
To me, in retrospect, it was amazing that 'Seinfeld' was a show that had such mass appeal. At first it was a disaster in the ratings, but then it became a cultural phenomenon. I don't know if that's possible anymore, but I don't try for that.
I think feature films sell on the idea, and I think TV works based almost entirely on execution. I don't think anybody is going, 'Wow, that show is executed poorly, but the idea is so cool I just have to keep watching.'
My friends back from the East Coast jokingly call me 'Hollywood,' and they assume I'm out at Hollywood parties, but I'm a domesticated guy with 3 kids.
I love television; I specifically love having a dumb character on a TV show.
I like the end of the year to be about something. Especially with younger shows, the network pushes you to make self-contained episodes; they don't like them to be serialized: 'We want this one to be funny for someone who's never watched it and will never watch again.' And I go 'Why would anyone want to do it like that?'
I hate shows, personally, where people stand around tossing stuff at each other, and any character can say any line, because you don't believe any of these characters care for each other. I used to fight with my friends who wrote on 'Seinfeld,' because they had such great pride in saying it was a show about nothing.
The landscape is television has changed so much, because there are so many outlets, that the odds of getting a zeitgeisty hit - you know how 'American Idol' seems to appeal to every human being on the planet? Doing that in comedy nowadays is very, very hard.
I love TV. I watch more TV than most people you know.
I think that the problem with network television is that they cling to the whole business model like they are clinging to the side of a cliff.
I believe that 99 percent of successful TV shows change an immense amount from the pilot to the tenth or twelfth episode.
