Read The Label #1: In Context Music “In nature, a sound only happens once, then is gone.”

It was predicted record labels would become a thing of the past, but they’ve arguably become more important than ever to the dissemination of audio. Read The Label aims to uncover and document the circumstances of these prime movers, big and small.

I had a lot of entities in mind for Read The Label #1, and I obsessed over which to choose. Everyone knows the first edition (of a record, in particular) is the most desirable run; everything that follows is but a recreation of that initial, pure moment. I’m hoping that won’t be the case with this column, of course, but there’s still that purity of being the one that popped the proverbial cherry. I considered going big, I considered going “hype,” I considered going international, but when it comes down to it, what has caught my attention as I’ve gotten deeper into the music game are the so-called “little guys,” because they’re the ones who make this all happen. You don’t get to be a “big guy” without being a “little guy” first, and on top of that, I genuinely believe the best audio emerges from the smallest cracks in the artistic pavement.

In Context Music is the perfect example of the above-idea put into motion. ICM, if anything, goes out of its way to be a subtle presence in the underground, with minimalist packaging, strict adherence (so far) to lathe-cut vinyl, and micro-run releases, most numbering 25 copies, an almost tortuously minuscule figure. Although In Context is a fledgling concern at this point, its output thus far is intimidating (and mostly sold-out), constituting highly specific, avant-garde, experimental, mostly minimalist sounds created by a wide spectrum of musicians, ranging from ex-Raccoo-oo-oon member/current Driphouse head honcho Darren Ho to underground master Che Chen to the minimalist-piano union of Nathan Liow and ICM founder Angus Tarnawsky. There’s something about In Context that burrows into the brain. If this is “small,” I don’t ever want to be “big.”

Tarnawsky dug deep to tell us about his distinctive venture and the many complicated considerations that went into sculpting its still-developing oeuvre.


Your label has a distinct identity in so many ways. First, your records so far have been on clear vinyl. That’s just the start of it but I’ll get to the other details about your releases in a minute. What I want to focus on initially is the specific choices you’ve made in regard to how In Context Music releases are presented visually.

I think that well-considered and properly executed design is important for a label. The end result can be the difference between choosing to listen to a record or not. I’ve taken a lot of chances based purely on that instinctual feeling. Whilst you can’t always judge a release by its cover, good art should engage you and help direct you toward good music. I work closely with my friend JD at Totem Visual to construct the art concepts for each release. We’ve tried to cultivate a visual direction that unifies many different artists’ intentions under one banner. Over time, the label will put out lots of different-sounding material, but our visual aesthetic will remain cohesive and as such, I believe people will be able to focus on the connections between different artists and why their releases are on ICM. My favorite labels definitely have that idea in mind.

Also, no album jackets, a pretty unique thing that, to me, works quite well and I’m not even sure why/how because I’ve always been a big album-jacket guy. How did you arrive at that strategy, if that’s the right word?

So far I’ve only released lathe-cut records. They are made out of transparent polycarbonate rather than black vinyl, and I wanted to showcase the inherit beauty of the discs so having transparent sleeves seemed like a step in the right direction. On a technical level though, it ended up being more difficult than I imagined. Firstly, there’s a certain type of rigidity that I wanted the releases to have. Regular PVC sleeves tend to be a bit flimsy when there’s a circular record inside. The corners get a bit wonky because there’s nothing too much stopping it from collapsing. I worked with a supplier and created a dual sleeve with an outer Mylar layer that helped to alleviate the issue. The current batch of records I’m releasing feature printed PVC sleeves but with custom square 7” discs to reinforce the use of a single jacket.

Have you thought about breaking from the ICM’s so-far ironclad traditions on future releases?

Absolutely. A lot of the concepts I have in mind won’t translate as easily onto 12” records as they have on the 7” and 10” format. So of course, later this year, we’ll be exploring some new directions both visually and sonically as we dive into that format.

I work very closely with every artist and I’ve definitely suggested things outside of what was originally submitted. It has to be like that — there’s no point in just saying, “Anything goes.” A lot of what I have to think about is, “How will this sound on a lathe?” Of course, keep in mind, I work with certain people because I believe in their music. It’s never a case of re-inventing the wheel — more so fine-tuning something already in motion.

What was your initial aim for the label, in the beginning? How have your goals changed since then?

At first I wanted the label to release custom-made physical objects that would allow the listener to interact with the sounds of a release in a very hands-on way. Each release was planned to only have a digital file for audio — not even a record to accompany whatever the object may have been. Of course, at a certain point it seemed to be maybe too much of a grandiose concept or perhaps even a little gimmicky? I quickly realized that I could explore the same area of expression and conceptual ideas through lathe-cut records. As time has passed, my goals have remained the same except I am now pushing to broaden the kind of sounds that we release and want to explore music on pressed vinyl as well.

Another aspect of the label I wanted to touch upon is the small runs: Twenty-five copies, 50 at most, from what I’ve seen so far. Why the scant editions?

It’s for two reasons. Firstly, ICM focuses on avant-garde music and small runs allow singular ideas to be more effectively distributed without worrying about recouping a large investment of cash required to create hundreds of copies. I run the label out of my own pocket so this is a necessity for the time being. Secondly, when you’re producing time-intensive, hand-made records (each release is cut in realtime rather than pressed as a batch from a master), limited editions make sense.

Do you see yourself slowly ramping up the number of records you produce as time and demand advances?

Yes and no — I think both approaches can work in tandem. Some of the upcoming records will be editions of a few-hundred copies and other releases will remain relatively limited edition. It will always be dictated by the material and the artist’s vision. I like starting small and developing concepts through bigger releases as time goes by.

Let’s talk about lathes a little. I see them pop up every now and again but they’re still not used much. What do you see as the advantages/disadvantages of lathe-cut vinyl recordings?

It’s an interesting process and people are often surprised by how simple it is. To summarize, it’s like a record player but working in reverse — the needle cuts grooves in blank discs rather than reproducing sound from existing grooves. If you’re buying lathe-cut records, they can appear pricey compared to pressed vinyl, but once you realize it’s more like buying a piece of art, it makes sense. That’s part of why the packaging and aesthetic is important in the bigger picture. I own a lathe and cut our releases, but it took me over a year of research and networking to make that happen. It’s kind of like a vintage car: a fantastic experience but with some unique quirks attached. The advantage of the medium is its immediacy. You can create records relatively quickly but of course they are mono rather than stereo and within the spectrum of “lo-fi” vs “hi-fi,” they could be considered “mid-fi.” I find the sonic character to be an endearing charm. Much like people enjoy the sound of tape saturation, I think a lathe cut is the best way to present certain material. DJs, on the other hand, probably won’t want to play any of these tracks as the grooves are shallower and overall volume a little quieter. On a side note, it’s fascinating that every time you play the disc, you are destroying it just a little as the needle of your record player is cutting a very slight additional groove into the disc. I like that idea of degradation as time goes by — it makes the first few plays very special.

But you’re asking listeners (or, customers) to buy a product that degrades… This seems crazy from a business standpoint. Can you explain this?

In nature, a sound only happens once, then is gone. With recording, we’ve managed to immortalize sound for our on-going consumption. The degradation of lathes rather than a pure, endlessly perfect reproduction — such as what a CD or digital file can achieve — is a nice middle ground between these two worlds. I like that the sound is pure at first, then grows older as time goes by. Also, I think that although the music may change over time, the beauty of the releases as physical objects remains in perpetuity.

Can you explain in more detail how you create your lathes? Seems like a lot of listening to the same thing. Do you always listen attentively or do you sort of crank them out during the course of your day?

Generally, it’ll take about 30 minutes to get most content EQ’d just right. Because the machines used to make the records are from the 1940s, lots of newer material has elements that weren’t ever meant to be handled by this kind of equipment. That’s part of what gives lathe cuts a unique sound. Then, it’s a matter of turning on the amplifier, sending to the audio to the machine, and making some test cuts. It might take around another 30 minutes to make sure everything is OK by making some adjustments, but then, basically, you can start cutting over and over. I don’t necessarily listen to what’s happening as I cut but I do have to manually operate the machine both at the start and end of each side so you are always present in the process. After each cut is finished, I check 10 seconds or so for every record to make sure that things are sounding as expected and if not, I’ll go back and find the source of the problem. It can be quite crazy! For example, I often have to take the machine apart after 20 or so cuts to re-calibrate mechanical parts of the lathe which are adding something unwanted to the cut.

I recently read an article wherein a label owner was talking about releasing the work of other musicians and the editing process and so forth, the gist being this: He didn’t think most labels push their artists enough, or to put it another way, most labels accept what artists submit and put it out as-is. How do you feel about that, the idea that a label could send someone’s music back if it didn’t find it acceptable?

I work very closely with every artist and I’ve definitely suggested things outside of what was originally submitted. It has to be like that — there’s no point in just saying, “Anything goes.” A lot of what I have to think about is, “How will this sound on a lathe?” Of course, keep in mind, I work with certain people because I believe in their music. It’s never a case of re-inventing the wheel — more so fine-tuning something already in motion. If you’re clear and open with your communication, people are usually happy to try things out.

Do you see ICM as a collaboration between artist and label or a label serving as more of a pure conduit for the output of an artist?

Most definitely a collaboration. However, I’m never working toward enforcing a personal perspective — I’m just focusing on what is best for the artist given the project. I like the position of being a curator and think that at all times, a light touch is best.

The Shelley Burgon 10-inch was a fantastic maiden voyage for ICM. It might sound like I’m overdoing it but I feel like it’s a perfect release, from top to bottom. How did your relationship with her come about?

I met Shelley through Maria Chavez. Both are great friends and wonderful people. Shelley is an amazing artist and it seemed fitting her very first solo release would be the first release for ICM. She makes work that touches people on many different levels and I’m proud of how that 10” turned out. It’s a good example of collaboration, as it was originally slated to be a 7” and, as you may have noticed, all other releases so far have been that way. None the less, we realized that splitting Shelley’s work over two sides didn’t make sense. In the end, we decided to shift to a 10” release so that the track could be one continuous experience. We’re working on a full length album at the moment, which is very exciting.

The Brian Chase release seemed like a strange one because he is the drummer for an incredibly popular group (a bit of trivia: I wrote my first-ever print cover-story on his full-time band in 2002), and here he is releasing a micro-run of abstract recordings. But that’s the thing, Chase has dabbled on the fringes before so it’s actually not that surprising to me personally (plus he’s always had a unique way of playing the drums, marching-style almost). Anyway, how did you make this release happen?

Brian and I work together musically quite a bit. We have a duo and quartet project (alongside bassist Richard Hoffman, [of] Sightings, and synthesist Jai Gonzalez). I’m a big fan of his attitude toward music, and think what he creates as a solo artist perfectly represents what the label is all about.


With the Daren Ho 3x7-inch you upped the ante considerably, with three records and a higher run of 50. How did that release come about and do you see yourself putting out more elaborate releases such as this or pulling back a bit and focusing on traditional single records?

Daren has distinct approach to what he does. It made sense that his release should be a bit more involved, as he works with modular synthesizers that contain remarkably complex routing patterns. He actually runs a store selling synths called Control. Definitely worth a visit if you’re in NY. Anyway, we brainstormed a few ideas and eventually thought that his record being split over multiple discs would allow listeners to construct their own connection to the work. I like it how you can just keep playing the tracks over and over in different combinations and it feels like you’re in the studio with him as he explores what his machines can do. I’d love to do more release like this in the future.

Can you tell me a bit about the ICM record you personally played on with Nathan Liow?

I went to university with Nathan in Melbourne, Australia. He’s a great pianist and composer. He called me up at the start of this year about contributing a work toward a group-art exhibition called, “Can we please play the internet?” Nathan referenced a piece I was developing called Timestreams that uses webcam imagery to trigger audio impulses for synthesizer, and suggested we collaborate on something in a similar vein. Eventually, what we documented for ICM004 was a compilation of recordings where[in] he played piano in a Melbourne gallery while sending the sound to me in NYC via FaceTime on a iPhone.

I subsequently processed this audio through a tape delay, then returned the signal to speakers within the gallery via Skype. Aside from the processing I was doing, the network of satellites and wires involved in what was happening left an undeniable mark on the material. The Skype call would cut in and out, creating rhythms or become warped and all the time, Nathan could hear these things going on and would adapt his playing to complement it. We called the piece Artifacts, as that’s a term for the unwanted sounds that often appear through digital compression.

In nature, a sound only happens once, then is gone. With recording, we’ve managed to immortalize sound for our on-going consumption. The degradation of lathes rather than a pure, endlessly perfect reproduction — such as what a CD or digital file can achieve — is a nice middle ground between these two worlds.

I have been thinking (wistfully perhaps?) a lot about the NYC show you were involved in that linked up three of my favorite buzz-labels right now: In Context Music, Styles Upon Styles, and L.I.E.S. It seemed sort of a strange match, or at least in the case of ICM I wouldn’t have necessarily expected it considering how different your records sound. What was the impetus behind that show?

I guess it’s an NY thing. My friends run both of those labels and we all decided one day, let’s just book a night that starts as experimental as possible and eventually becomes a party where people are dancing. That kind of thing can happen here, as you have a crowd who are willing to take risks and go on the adventure with you. Later this year, we’re going to throw more parties incorporating a couple of different labels, which I think you also will be excited about.

Running a label is so much less glamorous than it seems. In fact, it’s a bitch. I personally put out one tape, and a compilation, and quit. I haven’t been tempted to start up again. Have you found the rewards of the venture to outweigh the pitfalls?

It’s not easy but if you want to do something, you should follow through with your intentions no matter the obstacles. Starting ICM is really one of the best choices I have made.

Would you recommend starting a label that puts out physical releases to the young people comin’ up?

Yes! Contrary to what anyone might say, starting a physical label is quite feasible. You can do cassettes or lathe cuts and grow it to the point that you do larger runs of vinyl (if that’s something you desire). There’s plenty of great labels who follow this model, and I think it separates you dramatically from exclusively digital labels. At the end of the day, I listen to a lot of music on my computer, but I’ll always buy a physical release if I connect with it.

How about you personally? Are you a record collector? Where did the idea for this label project originate?

As a whole, I’m a creative person who enjoys enabling and inspiring others to create. I started the label to follow through with that idea and to create a platform to push myself and others. As for my personal record collection, I have a few but less than you might expect. For me, owning a large collection of records has become an increasingly impractical concept. I try to obtain or hold onto records that I have a close personal attachment [with], and prefer quality over quantity. I hope ICM reflects that vision, and that people will value the releases we make as time goes by.

I think that well-considered and properly executed design is important for a label. The end result can be the difference between choosing to listen to a record or not. I’ve taken a lot of chances based purely on that instinctual feeling… Good art should engage you and help direct you towards good music.

A lot of bands, their main goal is to get their music out to the most people in the shortest amount of time. Your label seems to be the antithesis of that because of the small runs. From an artist’s perspective why does it make sense to release a record through In Context Music?

The physical releases are only one part of the label. Really what we have is a community of like-minded artists, and through our collective ties, the work can often reach a far wider audience than just those who own the records or download the digital files. None of the artists I work with are interested in fame or fortune — they all simply want to express their ideas in the purest possible sense.

I’ve seen a lot of labels come and go over the last decade, and mostly the latter. How do you see ICM avoiding the sudden shut-downs that seem to happen so often to great sources of music?

My life and work are intrinsically linked to ICM. It helps that I have a very singular vision for all of what I am doing. I can imagine that there will be times where the release schedule may slow down a bit, but I am a very calculated planner and know exactly how far I can realistically take ICM. Really, the more important question for me is how big things will become and what that means in the long run.

What are some labels that have influenced the development of In Context Music?

I think I really connected with the importance of visual presentation when I started buying releases from PAN, Shelter Press, and Raster Noton. Sonically, Editions Mego and their associated sub-labels are big influence as are some of the classic experimental techno labels like Chain Reaction. All in all, I try to think of how ICM will fit in around great labels whilst still adding something unique to the landscape.

[That’s all, folks. Get ready for Read The Label #2: Shelter Press, coming the first Friday of November!]

Most Read



Etc.