Showing posts with label rzrecords. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rzrecords. Show all posts

In the Press: Paxit / DEDDOM Split Featured at Machine Music

Ahead of the upcoming split release, Ron Ben-Tovim over at Machine Music has published a massive feature interview with Andrii from DEDDOM and the Paxit crew, diving deep into their minds and memories, and showcasing the chaos that is this project. 

Alongside an extensive interview, the piece features an exclusive advance stream of the music. Introducing the project, Ron perfectly captures the spirit of the release:
"I guess there isn't any real way to introduce an international/intergalactic consortium of creative souls coming together to jazzgrind your mind away, but, hey, here's one way... We have Deddom, a Ukrainian, a grinding wizard of absolute proportions (think Swarrrm, only somehow crazier?) and Paxit, an Amsterdam-based, inter/trans-national gang of noise/drone/experimental magicians. With each side contributing 20 minutes of unhinged musical fare, expect, well, 40 minutes or so of musical glory to diarrhea into your mind." 

 Huge thanks to Ron for giving independent, extreme music such a dedicated platform and for asking such interesting and thoughtful questions. Head over to Machine Music to read the full interview, unpack the concepts behind the tracks, and get a first listen to the noise:
👉 Read the Feature & Stream the Premiere Here
 

Album Premiere and Interview: Get Sucked into a Jazz-Grind-Drone Vortex with Deddom and Paxit
Get Sucked into a Jazz-Grind-Drone Vortex with DEDDOM and Paxit 



The new, two track split album, elegantly (and shockingly) titled DEDDOM/Paxit is out this Friday via RZRecords and Erythroleukoplakia Records.

Don't forget to follow if you want to know what happens when a Ukrainian grinding wizard meets an Amsterdam-based gang of noise/drone magicians!


BONUS UPDATE:

When Streaming Platforms Remove Your Release: Why It Happens and How to Fix It

A Detailed Guide to Streaming Removals: Why Albums Disappear and How to Fix It

By gaop · Updated: April 2026 · Reading time: ~15 min

A practical, no-nonsense guide for noobs,independent artists and labels, including a real-world case study from the RZRecords catalog.

Why Streaming Platforms Remove Albums From Sale

Having a release vanish from Spotify, Apple Music, or any other streaming platform is one of the most disorienting things that can happen to an independent artist. One day your album is there; the next it's gone. No warning. Often no explanation. For smaller labels and DIY artists without dedicated legal or business support, this can feel like hitting a wall. Understanding why platforms pull releases is the first step toward doing something about it.

The causes broadly fall into the following categories:

  • Copyright Disputes or Claimed Ownership Conflicts: A third party has claimed ownership of your content — either your recordings or the underlying composition. This is common when samples are used, when cover songs are uploaded without a proper mechanical license, or when a distributor's metadata conflicts with an existing rights claim. Platforms typically act on claims first and investigate later.
  • Metadata Errors or Missing Rights Information: Incorrect ISRC codes, missing rights holders, mismatched UPCs, or undefined territories can trigger automatic removal. Streaming platforms use metadata to determine whether a release is legally cleared for distribution in each region. Gaps in that data can cause silently automated takedowns.
  • Distributor Policy Violations: Some distributors have content guidelines — prohibitions on certain subject matter, audio quality thresholds, or formatting requirements. If a release is flagged post-upload for a policy violation, the distributor may pull it unilaterally. Artists are rarely notified proactively.
  • Fraudulent Streaming Activity on Associated Playlists (The Bot Trap): This is the most opaque and frustrating cause: your release is removed not because of anything you did, but because it appeared on a playlist that the platform identified as using artificial stream inflation (bots). You are, in effect, collateral damage. We cover this in detail below. Note that this is sometimes an issue due to spikes in listeners scaring other playlist participants that rush to complain about the playlist, resulting in a flag that might hurt everyone.
  • Platform-Specific Enforcement Actions: Platforms sometimes run broad enforcement sweeps targeting categories of content. Experimental, noise, and avant-garde music has historically been caught in genre-based misclassification filters that confuse it with AI-generated filler content.
  • Distributor Account Issues: If your distributor's account has payment issues, compliance failures, or their own policy violations, every release distributed through them can be pulled simultaneously. This is rare but has happened before with smaller aggregators.

Important: Platforms do not always send removal notifications. Regularly check your releases manually and set up Google Alerts for your artist and album names, just in case.

What Causes Playlists to Be Flagged for Bot Activity

Streaming fraud — the practice of using bots or automated accounts to inflate play counts — is a genuine and large-scale problem. Platforms invest significant resources into detecting and removing fraudulent streams. The problem for artists is that the detection systems are blunt instruments, and legitimate releases frequently get caught in the sweep.

How Platforms Detect Bot Activity
Streaming platforms use a combination of automated algorithms and manual audits to identify suspicious behavior. The signals they look for include:

  • Abnormal Play Rates From Identical IP Ranges
    Thousands of streams originating from the same IP address clusters — especially datacenter IPs — indicate automated playback rather than real listeners.
  • Near-Zero Listening Duration
    Bots often skip through tracks after a few seconds, just long enough to count as a stream. A track with a very high play count but an average listening duration of 5–10 seconds is a red flag.
  • Geographically Implausible Traffic Spikes
    An artist with no prior audience in a given region suddenly receiving thousands of streams from that region, with no corresponding social activity or press, triggers platform review.
  • Accounts Created in Bulk
    Coordinated bot networks often create thousands of accounts at once. Platforms track account creation metadata and can identify clusters of accounts exhibiting identical behavior.
  • Playlist-Level Pattern Anomalies
    When multiple tracks on the same playlist all show the same suspicious patterns simultaneously, the platform flags the playlist as the likely vector. All tracks on that playlist then become subject to review — and potentially removal.

Key Takeaway: You don't have to be involved in fraud to be affected. Mixing genuine music into a fraudulent playlist makes the bot activity look more organic to the curator, but it leaves the artist exposed. You can easily get punished for something you did not do.

Why Are Legitimate Artists Included on Fraudulent Playlists?
Playlist curators — particularly third-party playlist operators not affiliated with official labels — sometimes add legitimate releases alongside others, knowingly or not. From a fraudster's perspective, mixing genuine music into a playlist makes the activity look more organic. From an artist's perspective, receiving a playlist placement often looks like an organic discovery. There is frequently no way to know in advance whether a playlist you've been added to is being manipulated. This is not a niche edge case. It is a structural vulnerability of the streaming ecosystem that affects independent artists at a disproportionate rate, since they are more likely to be placed on informal, non-curated playlists by fans or curators with no institutional accountability.

Collective Punishment: How Innocent Artists Get Caught in Bot Crackdowns

When platforms and distributors respond to playlist-level fraud, they frequently do so with what amounts to collective enforcement: every artist whose release appeared on the flagged playlist is penalized together, regardless of individual involvement.

The detection is automated. The punishment is collective. The appeal process is manual, slow, and stacked against the artist.

This creates a deeply unfair situation. An artist who had nothing to do with the fraudulent activity — who may not have even known they were on the playlist — faces the same removal as if they had orchestrated the fraud themselves. Smaller independent artists, who lack the leverage of major label representation, have fewer options to contest these decisions.

The problem is compounded by the fact that distributors are often not equipped to fight these decisions on behalf of their artists. They may pass on the removal notice without context, or they may simply not respond at all. Some distributors' terms of service explicitly disclaim responsibility for platform-level enforcement actions, leaving the artist with no clear path forward.

RZRecords Case Study: In Drone We Trust — NishMa, Haggari Nakashe & gaop

In Drone We Trust — NishMa, Haggari Nakashe & gaop

In Drone We Trust is a collaborative album by three distinct artists: NishMa, Haggari Nakashe, and gaop. The project was years in the making — an international collaboration that occupied the entirety of 2023, bringing together three artists working in drone, dark ambient, experimental noise, free jazz motifs, and woodwind instrumentation. It is, in the best possible sense, difficult music: thick, meditative, heavy-hitting, and uncompromising.

The album was first made exclusively available for streaming through Ranger Magazine — a web publication (with printed editions) dedicated to experimental art, poetry, music, and film, as part of their fourth issue. This was not a standard release pathway. It was a curated, editorial partnership between RZRecords and a publication whose values aligned with the music itself.

After the Ranger Magazine exclusive window, In Drone We Trust was made available across all major streaming platforms. You can read the original release announcement on the RZRecords blog, and the album remains available in full on Bandcamp.

What Happened

The release was subsequently scrubbed from streaming platforms. The cause was not a copyright dispute. It was not a metadata error. The album had been included on playlists that were subsequently flagged by the platform for bot activity. As with most such enforcement actions, the artists involved were not informed proactively, and they had no involvement whatsoever in the fraudulent activity. They were on the playlist. That was enough.

This is a textbook example of collective punishment in streaming enforcement. Three artists, working in an extremely niche genre, operating through a small non-profit collective, with no commercial incentive to commit streaming fraud — lost access to one of their primary distribution channels because an automated system decided their release was collateral damage in someone else's scheme.

The album was announced in advance as early as December 2023, reflecting the care and time invested in it. The artists' intent, the publication partnership, and the community reception were all irrelevant to the enforcement algorithm.

Where It Stands Now

In Drone We Trust remains fully available and purchasable on Bandcamp. This is precisely why artist-controlled platforms matter. Bandcamp cannot pull your release because of a third-party playlist decision. Your music stays where you put it.

How to Solve a Removal: Step-by-Step

  1. Confirm the Removal Across All Platforms
    Check every platform your distributor delivered to. Sometimes a removal affects one platform, sometimes many. Knowing the scope tells you whether this is a platform-specific decision or a distributor-level issue.
  2. Contact Your Distributor in Writing
    Email (not live chat) your distributor and request a formal explanation. Include your release title, UPC, and ISRC codes. Ask specifically: "Has this release been removed at the platform's request, and if so, what was the stated reason?" Get everything in writing.
  3. Request Your Streaming Data
    If the removal is related to playlist flagging, request your streaming analytics. Your plays, listener demographics, and account-level data are yours. Evidence that your streams came from real, dispersed listeners weakens the case for your release being fraudulent.
  4. File a Formal Dispute
    Most distributors have a dispute or appeals process. File one. Even if the outcome is uncertain, this creates a paper trail and demonstrates that you are contesting the decision, which matters if the situation escalates.
  5. Contact the Platform Directly
    Spotify, Apple Music, and others have artist support channels. Spotify for Artists includes a help and support feature. Apple Music has artist support through Apple Music for Artists. Contact them independently of your distributor; sometimes the platform can resolve what the distributor cannot.
  6. Escalate Through Artist Advocacy Resources
    Organizations like the Musicians Foundation, the Future of Music Coalition, and similar advocacy groups sometimes provide guidance or can apply indirect pressure in cases of systemic platform failures. Legal clinics at music schools and arts organizations can also offer preliminary advice.

Timeline Tip: Streaming platform support is slow. Expect weeks, not days. Do not wait on a resolution before implementing your fallback strategy (see below).

Your Removal Dispute Checklist

  • Confirmed removal across all platforms ✓
  • Documented removal date and scope ✓
  • Collected all release metadata (UPC, ISRC, original delivery confirmation) ✓
  • Sent written request for explanation to distributor ✓
  • Filed formal dispute with distributor ✓
  • Submitted artist support request to platform directly ✓
  • Requested streaming analytics / data report ✓
  • Backed up master files and all release assets ✓
  • Confirmed Bandcamp listing is active and up to date ✓
  • Notified your audience about alternate listening links ✓

Prevention Strategies for Independent Artists and Labels

  • Keep Copies of All Metadata and Master Files: Maintain an organized record of every UPC, ISRC, release date, territory setting, and delivery confirmation for every release. If a removal dispute requires you to prove what was submitted and when, this documentation is essential.
  • Distribute Across Multiple Platforms Simultaneously: If Spotify pulls your release, having it on Apple Music, Tidal, Deezer, and YouTube Music means your listeners still have access. Mono-platform dependence magnifies the impact of any single removal.
  • Maintain a Permanent Bandcamp Presence: Treat Bandcamp as your canonical release page, not as a secondary option. It is the only major music platform that does not remove your music on behalf of third-party algorithmic decisions.
  • Be Selective About Playlist Submission Services: Paid playlist placement services are often the primary vector through which fraudulent playlists reach legitimate music. Vet any service carefully. If a service guarantees a large number of streams for a fixed fee, it is almost certainly operating fraudulent playlists.
  • Monitor Your Streaming Analytics Regularly: Unusual traffic spikes, particularly from regions inconsistent with your known audience — can indicate that your release has been added to a suspicious playlist. Catching this early lets you proactively contact your distributor before a removal occurs.
  • Build a Direct Audience Relationship: Mailing lists, Bandcamp followers, and direct community spaces (Discord, forums, Reddit, local scenes) are forms of audience connection that no streaming platform can revoke. The artists most resilient to streaming removals are those who have built audiences that exist independently of any single platform.

When Platforms or Distributors Refuse to Fix the Removal

Sometimes the appeals process goes nowhere. The distributor cites their terms of service. The platform does not respond. You are left with a removed release and no recourse through official channels. This is more common than it should be, and it is especially common for artists in experimental and underground genres who do not have the institutional weight to demand attention.

When official channels fail, here are your realistic options:

  1. Switch Distributors and Re-Distribute: This is often the most effective path. Take your release and distribute it through a different aggregator. DistroKid, TuneCore, CD Baby, Amuse, and others each have different relationships with platforms and different enforcement interpretations. A fresh submission through a different distributor sometimes simply works. Note: a new UPC may be required, which means the old streaming links will not redirect to the new listing.
  2. Make Bandcamp Your Primary Storefront: Bandcamp is artist-controlled. No automated algorithm can pull your release from Bandcamp because it was on someone else's playlist. It supports pay-what-you-want pricing, name-your-price downloads, and physical merch. If you do not treat Bandcamp as your primary platform already, a streaming removal is the clearest possible argument for doing so now.
  3. Use Your Own Website and Mailing List: A mailing list is the only audience channel you own outright. No platform can take it from you. If you have one, use this moment to direct people to your site and to sign up. If you do not have one, start building one. Services like Mailchimp, Substack, and Buttondown all have free tiers.
  4. Document and Publish a Transparency Statement: As a last resort, a measured, factual account of what happened — published on your blog or label site — creates a public record and can generate community support and press attention. Do not speculate about causes beyond what you can verify; stick to the documented facts. This is not an approach to take lightly, but it is a legitimate tool when systemic failures leave artists with no other recourse.
  5. Explore Legal Remedies: If significant revenue was lost as a result of a wrongful removal, legal advice may be warranted. Many arts organizations offer free or low-cost legal consultations. The Volunteer Lawyers for the Arts (US) is one example; similar organizations exist in the UK, Canada, Israel, and across Europe. A consultation does not require committing to litigation.

What Not to Do: Do not attempt to re-upload the same release under a different title or slightly altered metadata in order to bypass the removal. This violates most distributors' terms of service and can result in account suspension — losing access to all your other releases in the process.

Can I Re-upload a Release After it is Removed?

If you search for advice on this, you will find two conflicting answers. One warns of total account bans, while the other suggests releasing "new versions." Both are true, depending on how you do it.

The Risk: The "Evasion" Trap

Do not attempt to re-upload the same release under a different title or slightly altered metadata just to bypass a removal. This is flagged by distributors as "Terms of Service Evasion" or "Metadata Fraud." If you are caught, you risk a permanent account suspension—losing access to your entire catalog, not just the single release.

The Solution: The "Special Edition" Path

Releasing a special edition or a new version of the same album is a legitimate industry practice, provided it is treated as a new product. This allows you to restore the music to the platforms safely.

How to Safely Re-release Your Music

To avoid being flagged for duplicate content or evasion, follow these technical requirements:

  • New ISRC Codes: You must assign new ISRC (International Standard Recording Code) numbers to the tracks. Do not reuse the codes from the removed version, as platforms will attempt to "link" the history, triggering the original flag.
  • New Artwork: Create a variation of the original cover art to signal to visual algorithms that this is a different edition.
  • Updated Title: Append a subtitle to the album name, such as "Deluxe Edition," "2026 Remaster," or "Expanded Version."
  • Additional Value: Ideally, include a bonus track, a live recording, or a remix. This makes the release a distinct entity in the eyes of the distributor’s compliance team.
Feature Re-upload (High Risk) Special Edition (Safe Path)
ISRC Codes Uses original ISRC Requires NEW ISRC
Album Metadata Identical or near-identical New Title (e.g., + "Deluxe")
Artwork Same image Modified/Updated image
Outcome Likely account suspension Standard new release
Play Counts Tries to keep old stats Starts from zero

Bottom Line: If a removal dispute fails, treating the release as a new, improved edition is the most reliable way to maintain your standing with your distributor while keeping your art accessible to your audience.


Full Q&A Reference for Artists

Why do streaming platforms remove albums from sale?
Streaming platforms remove albums for several distinct reasons: copyright disputes or rights ownership conflicts, metadata errors such as missing or incorrect ISRC and UPC data, distributor policy violations, association with playlists flagged for fraudulent streaming activity (bot use), or broader platform enforcement sweeps. Of these, the most opaque and unfair cause for independent artists is playlist-level enforcement: a release is pulled not because of any fault of its own, but because it appeared on a playlist that automated systems flagged for artificial stream inflation. The affected artists are rarely notified in advance and may have had no knowledge that their music was on a problematic playlist.
What causes playlists to be flagged for bot activity on streaming platforms?
Platforms flag playlists for bot activity when they detect patterns inconsistent with organic human listening. These include streams originating from datacenter IP clusters rather than residential connections, playback sessions with very short average listen durations (a few seconds per track), sudden and geographically implausible traffic spikes, activity from accounts created in bulk with identical behavioral signatures, and correlated abnormal patterns across all tracks on the same playlist simultaneously. When a playlist is flagged, all releases on it, including those by entirely innocent artists who had no involvement in the fraud, become subject to removal. This is commonly called collective punishment, and it is a known structural flaw in how major streaming platforms enforce against fraud.
How can an artist get their release restored after it is removed from a streaming platform?
The process begins with written communication: contact your distributor immediately, request a formal explanation with the specific reason for removal, and file a formal dispute using the distributor's appeals process. Simultaneously, contact the platform's artist support channel directly (such as Spotify for Artists help or Apple Music for Artists support), as the platform and distributor sometimes resolve issues independently. Request your streaming analytics to demonstrate that your release's play patterns were organic. If the removal stemmed from playlist flagging, evidence that your streams came from real and dispersed listeners supports your case. Document every step, every date, and every response. If official channels fail, re-distributing through an alternative distributor, which may require a new UPC, is often the most reliable path to restoration.
What should artists do when streaming platforms or distributors refuse to restore a removed release?
When official appeals fail, independent artists have several options. Switching to an alternative distributor and resubmitting the release is the most practical first step; a fresh submission through a different aggregator sometimes bypasses the flag that caused the original removal. Artists should also establish or reinforce their presence on Bandcamp, which is artist-controlled and cannot pull your release due to third-party playlist decisions. Building a direct mailing list ensures you have an audience communication channel that no platform can revoke. In cases where significant financial harm occurred, consulting a legal clinic, many arts organizations offer free or subsidized consultations, may be warranted. Publishing a transparent, factual account of what happened is a legitimate last resort that can generate community support and accountability. Throughout, maintain full backups of all master files and release metadata.
Can artists be punished for bot activity they did not cause?
Yes. This is one of the most documented and criticized aspects of streaming enforcement. When a playlist is flagged for fraudulent streaming, all releases on that playlist can be removed regardless of individual artist involvement. Artists have no control over which playlists their music is added to — particularly informal, fan-curated, or third-party playlists. The result is that entirely innocent artists lose streaming access because their music was included as apparent legitimacy cover for a fraudulent operation they knew nothing about. There is currently no systemic industry solution to this problem; the burden of disputing wrongful removal falls entirely on the affected artist.
Is Bandcamp safe from streaming removal actions?
Bandcamp operates fundamentally differently from algorithmic streaming platforms. It is a direct artist-to-listener marketplace, not an algorithmic recommendation ecosystem. Bandcamp does not use playlist-based content discovery in the same way Spotify or Apple Music do, and it does not remove releases based on third-party playlist flagging. Artists control their own storefronts directly. While Bandcamp can remove content that violates its own terms of service (such as content infringing copyright), it does not engage in the kind of collective playlist-based enforcement that affects releases on major streaming platforms. For this reason, maintaining a complete and up-to-date Bandcamp presence is one of the most important things an independent artist can do as a hedge against streaming platform actions.
What happened to In Drone We Trust by NishMa, Haggari Nakashe and gaop?
In Drone We Trust, a collaborative drone/dark ambient/experimental album released through RZRecords and first premiered via Ranger Magazine, was removed from major streaming platforms after it appeared on playlists that were subsequently flagged for bot activity. The artists had no involvement in the fraudulent streaming activity and were not notified before the removal. The release remains fully available on Bandcamp. This case illustrates the structural vulnerability of independent experimental artists to streaming enforcement actions: a release built on genuine artistic collaboration, released through a carefully chosen editorial partner, and representing months of work was removed from primary distribution channels due to third-party fraud the artists could neither have prevented nor anticipated.

OO / HN: Oddity Odyssey Meets Haggari Nakashe

RZRecords cat: RZR25OOHNs · UPC: 5063831102720 · New-ish Release · Digital


OO / HN by Oddity Odyssey / Haggari Nakashe
OO / HN by Oddity Odyssey / Haggari Nakashe


Noise is a universal language, but every practitioner speaks it with a different accent. OO / HN, the new-ish split release between Oddity Odyssey (Hanford, California) and Haggari Nakashe (Ontario, Canada) is proof of that. Two artists, two coasts, one uncompromising vision.

One of the things we love most about the underground experimental scene is that it has no borders, geographic, stylistic, or otherwise. OO / HN, this split between Oddity Odyssey and Haggari Nakashe, is a living example of that.

Oddity Odyssey comes from DJ Krooked's world, a prolific, restless corner of the Bandcamp noise underground rooted in Hanford, California, where avant-garde chaos and underground, experimental-alterative hip-hop are practically the mission statement. Haggari Nakashe is, of course, family here at RZRecords, a sound artist whose work has stretched from harsh noise to dark ambient to free jazz bass improvisation, always on his own terms.

Each side clocks in at roughly fifteen minutes, and that runtime is intentional. This isn't a quick handshake between collaborators. It's two extended statements, placed side by side, inviting you to sit with the discomfort and find the thread connecting them.

Track 1: Oddity Odyssey — Shades of Yorick (15:48)

The title pulls from Shakespeare's most famous meditation on mortality, Yorick, the dead jester whose skull Hamlet holds and addresses in Act V. There's something fitting about that reference here. Shades of Yorick feels like a piece that exists in the aftermath of something, sifting through remains. Oddity Odyssey constructs a sprawling, abrasive environment over nearly sixteen minutes, harsh, textured, and unsettling in a way that doesn't rush toward resolution. It earns its runtime.

Track 2: Haggari Nakashe — You guys make noises in your sleep sleep sleep (15:00)

The title is more personal, more intimate, and that intimacy makes it somehow more disquieting than the grandeur of the first track. Sleep is supposed to be safe, unconscious, unguarded. Whatever noises are being made here, they aren't reassuring. Haggari brings fifteen minutes of the layered, patient sound design that has become his signature, droning, dark-ambient noise that doesn't assault so much as it accumulates, surrounding you before you realize what's happened.

These two worlds obviously overlap on paper. And that's exactly the point. Some splits are about artists who already sound alike, they're about artists who share a commitment, and even if the expressions slightly differ, the dark hug this type of sound provides, that's the same. Both Oddity Odyssey and Haggari Nakashe operate outside of genre comfort zones, release prolifically, and treat sound and noise as a serious artistic language rather than a provocation for its own sake.

Some releases slip through the cracks. Not because they aren't worthy, quite the opposite. OO / HN, the split between Oddity Odyssey and Haggari Nakashe, came out on September 27, 2025, and quietly went about its business the way the best underground releases do: no fanfare, no algorithm, just thirty minutes of uncompromising noise sitting there waiting for the right ears. We feel it deserves more than that. Consider this a second look, a belated flag in the ground, a reminder that this one exists and that you should be listening to it.

OO / HN is available name-your-price via krooked.bandcamp.com, with distribution support from RZRecords. This one feels like the beginning of something. Stay tuned.


The Architecture of Dissonance: A Deep Dive into xPhin’s Tableaux, Vol. III

RZRecords cat: RZR2025xPtv3 · UPC: 5063845256297  · New-ish Release · Digital

A Note on Our Bias: Full disclosure, this release comes to you directly via our label. While that technically makes us biased, the truth is far simpler than any conflict of interest, we are, first and foremost, massive, unabashed fans. We've been following and actively supporting xPhin's evolution for some years now, watching him grow into one of the most interesting, distinctive and uncompromising voices in experimental sound. We're only releasing this because we genuinely believe it is an essential addition to the experimental canon, a work that deserves to exist in the world and find the ears it was made for. We are deeply honored to act as the vessel for this unique transmission, and we don't take that responsibility lightly.


Tableaux, Vol. III by xPhin
Tableaux, Vol. III by xPhin


The Evolution of a Sound Architect

xPhin has carved out a singular status operating at the volatile intersection of electronic, ambient, and noise music. For those who joined us for our previous release of his album Takahashi, you’ll remember the "certified bangers" and melodic synth drones that eventually gave way to face-melting HNW assaults. While Takahashi showed xPhin as a skilled storyteller guiding us through a specific journey, Tableaux, Vol. III finds him in a more architectural, conceptual headspace.

Beyond the Song Structure

This isn't a collection of tracks in the traditional sense, and it would be a disservice to approach it as one. It is, once again, a conceptual series of "aural trips" that are defined by thematic exploration over conventional melody (that's present, btw), by a dense atmosphere over accessibility. xPhin treats sound as a physical material, meticulously arranging a broad variety of shapes, textures, and depths across the noise spectrum with the precision of a sculptor and the patience of an architect. Every frequency feels placed with intent; every shift in texture feels earned. Where Takahashi sometimes offered a "punchy" minimalism, moments of rhythmic clarity that gave the listener something to hold onto, Tableaux offers something altogether more immersive: a shifting, pulsing, breathing soundscape that is designed to be felt as much as it is heard. There is no handrail here. You are simply asked to step inside.

The Dynamics of Silence and Sound

Throughout the nine tracks of this expansive release (one hour and thirty six minutes), xPhin demonstrates a masterful and deeply considered control over tension. He builds multi-dimensional compositions by placing overwhelming blasts of textured sound and noise in deliberate dialogue with moments of stark, clinical silence and complex sub-rhythmic throbbing beneath the surface. The quiet is never truly quiet. The loud is never merely loud. It is a work of "tactile" electronics, you don't just simply sit and listen to these frequencies; you feel them, navigate them, and at times, you brace against them. 

The album consistently challenges the listener to identify the melody and find deep emotional resonance buried within the static. Whether it is a subtle, haunting hum drifting at the edge of perception or a dense, suffocating wall of melodic digital grit, every element is purposeful, every sound serving the larger conceptual whole. Nothing is accidental. Nothing is wasted. It is, in the truest sense, a masterclass in experimental composition, one that requires your undivided attention and richly rewards every moment of it.




How to Listen

In an era of disposable background music and algorithmically optimized streams, xPhin demands, and deserves, a fundamentally different approach. This is not music for the commute, for the gym, or for passive consumption of any kind. Clear your schedule. Put your phone face down. Find a comfortable space, close your eyes if you need to, and simply allow the Tableaux to unfold around you at its own pace and on its own terms. Trust the process. 

While his work is available across various streaming platforms, the most meaningful and direct way to support the artist's vision and the broader craft of independent noise music is to go straight to the source. Skip the algorithm. Own the work.

Experience the full sound experiment here: xphin.bandcamp.com/album/tableaux-vol-iii 




A Note on Timing

Tableaux, Vol. III is a very late 2025 release that, due to a storm of technical failures and personal chaos, never got its moment. It slipped out quietly when it should have arrived like a thunderclap, and that is a failure we feel in our bones every time we listen to it, which is often. Because here is the thing about this record: it is the kind of work that stops you mid-sentence, mid-thought, mid-whatever-you-were-doing, and reminds you why experimental music exists in the first place. It is the kind of record that people should have been talking about in late 2025, that should have been quietly passed between the obsessives and the devoted, dog-eared and worn down from repeated listens. That conversation should already be happening. The cult should already be forming. And if you are reading this and you haven't heard it yet, if this record somehow passed you by too, then understand that you are standing at the edge of something. There is a before and an after with music like this, and right now you are still in the before.

That ends now. We refuse, flatly and permanently, to let this record become a footnote. We refuse to let it gather dust in the corner of a Bandcamp page (or Spotify, or Apple Music) while the world moves on to the next disposable release. Some records are too important, too singular, too alive to be left to the mercy of bad timing and unfortunate circumstance, and Tableaux is unquestionably one of them. There are artists who make noise, and then there is xPhin, who makes you understand, perhaps for the first time, what well-done noise is actually capable of. Missing this record is not just missing a release. It is missing a moment of genuine artistic reckoning, one that does not come around often and does not wait for you to be ready.

So consider this our attempt at correction, our reclamation, our loud and unapologetic insistence that great art does not have an expiry date and does not quietly accept being overlooked. Tableaux is here. It has always been here. It is vital, it is uncompromising, and it demands, not requests, demands, to be heard. We are simply making sure the world finally knows it. Get there before everyone else does. You will want to say you were early on this one.

Field Recordings as Music, Part 2: From Captured Sound to Composition

By the RZRecords Editorial Collective


  Everything is pure signal. Life is. The world is already performing. Make sure you’re not too late to press record.

In the universe of experimental audio, DIY noise, and deep listening, we spend too much time debating gear and synthesis. But the most radical “instruments” are not built - they are captured. A subway train’s metallic groan, the granular shift of gravel under boots, your nana's cutlery, birds in the sky (you know how I feel), the 50Hz hum of a forgotten power line - these are the voices of an acoustic world that never stops composing. At RZRecords, we believe that field recordings are not mere background texture; they are the raw, unfiltered sonic matter of reality itself.

Welcome to the followup to our previous thought piece: Field Recordings as Music: When Background Becomes Foreground. Let's dive right in.

We hope this sound finds you well
We hope this sound finds you well


“When does a background sound stop being an annoyance and start being the lead instrument? The answer lies not in the sound itself, but in the framing of the listener.”

This pillar guide fuses our two seminal manifestos into one definitive resource. We will trace the lineage of musique concrète, decode the discipline of reduced listening, explore minimalist framing, and give you actionable field missions. Whether you are a noise artist, a sound designer, or a curious listener - step into the ecosystem. The environment is your collaborator.

Gemini said

While this reads like a "how-to" guide, and in many ways, it is, please remember there is no right or wrong way to do this.
The heart of experimentation is the freedom to try, fail, and learn while having fun. The results will naturally vary; you might find beauty in an output that others dislike, or vice versa. Ultimately, the value lies in the process, both your journey of discovery and the experience of the listener, if you choose to share your recordings with anyone.
If you indeed choose to share your findings, we’d love to hear them. Who knows? Perhaps we can make some beautiful music together.


1. The Art of Found Sound & Musique Concrète

The history of field recording as music stretches back to the pioneers of Musique Concrète. Figures like Pierre Schaeffer understood that a train whistle or a factory hum has a frequency and rhythm just as valid as a piano note. They introduced the concept of the objet sonore (sound object) - a sound appreciated for its own sake, divorced from its source. By pulling these sounds out of their natural environment and placing them into a composition, we force the listener to confront the acoustic ecology of our world. It turns the act of listening into an act of discovery. We aren’t just hearing a place; we are experiencing the sonic document of a moment that will never happen exactly the same way again.

Deep Theory: Practicing “Reduced Listening”

At RZRecords, we try hard to practice reduced listening (l’Ă©coute rĂ©duite). This is the discipline of ignoring what made the sound and focusing entirely on its physical properties. When we audit a recording, we look for:

  • Textural Depth - The granular grit of gravel shifting or the “furry” quality of wind hitting a diaphragm.
  • Industrial Rhythms - The accidental loops of heavy machinery that provide a mechanical “swing”.
  • Spatial Awareness - The way sound bounces off concrete, creating a natural reverb no plugin can perfectly replicate.

This creates a spiritual palate cleanser. An abstract sound can help unclutter the mind, prepping the psyche for states of being that demand a departure from traditional musical structures.


2. Minimalism and the Power of the Frame

Usually, field recordings are used as “ear candy” or intros. However, sometimes the most radical move a creator can make is to let the recording stand alone. This is the pure, ultimate form of minimalism. Sitting with a raw field recording is a confrontational experience - it strips away the safety net of harmony and forces a meditative focus on the transient nature of sound itself.

Compositional Strategies:

  • Narrative Slice: The art of curation. Choosing the specific slice of a two-hour recording that captures a perfect emotional arc.
  • Looping: Repetition creates rhythm where none existed. It is the first step toward “musicalizing” the environment.
  • Subtraction: Removing frequencies until the hidden meaning of the noise appears. Silence, repetition, and small edits are enough to turn raw material into a structured piece.

One powerful example: a 90-second loop of rain on a sheet-metal roof, slightly faded in and out, becomes a kind of percussion piece. A 3-minute handheld recording of a busy street, with only the first and last 10 seconds cut off, can feel like a subtle narrative arc. You aren’t filling the space; you’re revealing what’s already there.


3. The Studio as an Ecosystem

Treating the field recording as a sacred foundation means building layers that respect the original environment. We don’t just “mix” sounds; we collaborate with the space. The recording is not a background ambience - it’s the compositional blueprint. Your job is not to overpower it, but to respond to it.

StrategyPhilosophical IntentTechnical Execution
BlueprintEnvironment leads the mix.Use natural reverb of a cave/room to set delay times for synths.
SyncHumanize digital timing.De-quantize drum machines to match the rhythmic pattern of a train.
MiningExtract hidden melody.Find the pitch of a drone (like a 50Hz power line) and tune the track to it.

In re-contextualization, every move is a statement: time-stretching a 2-second bus passing-by into 30 seconds of granular texture, pitch-shifting a metal gate into a low-register bass line, or layering two unrelated field recordings to create a new sonic ecosystem. The “glitch” is not a flaw; it’s the face of the environment showing through.


4. Psychoacoustics: When the Ear Starts Hallucinating

As shown by Alvin Lucier, sound perception evolves over time. When a sound is repeated or sustained, the brain begins to complete patterns that don’t exist. Noise becomes rhythm. Texture becomes structure. The mind is the final instrument in the signal chain.

This aligns with Soundscape Theory - the idea that every place has a sonic identity. By manipulating time through stretching and granular methods, we allow these identities to expand into environments of their own. The random “melody” of birds or machinery becomes the seed for a bassline; the irregular tempo of passing traffic becomes the grid for a drum machine. Instead of forcing the environment into a rigid grid, you slightly de-quantize the machine to match reality.

Key Insight: Field recordings share a secret with traditional instruments: they have pitch, rhythm, and timbre, even if they never repeat in a “musical” way. The roar of a subway train, the crackle of a power line - they trace arcs of attack, sustain, and decay that can be felt as phrases.

5. From Signal to Sculpture: Rhythm, Harmony & Narrative

In many experimental and DIY noise releases, field recordings are treated as textural seasoning. But they can also drive the whole piece. Rhythm: The irregular clatter of a train on tracks, or the drip of a leaky faucet, can be sliced into a loop that feels uncanny because it’s almost, but not quite, metrical. Harmony: The resonance of a large room, the sympathetic hum of power lines, or the drone of a distant highway can become the harmonic bed of a track, with discrete instruments “playing” inside that world.

The artist moves from being a passive recorder to an active curator. Editing is the second act of capture: finding the 45 seconds within a 2-hour recording that contain the most coherent emotional journey. Sequencing arranges multiple unrelated field recordings so they feel like a single psychic landscape, even if they were recorded in different cities or years. Markers, fades, crossfades, and tiny volume adjustments become your phrasing tools.


6. Performance: Sound in Motion

Field recordings become active instruments when performed live. They are no longer static snapshots but living textures that interact with a room’s acoustics, feedback loops, and the energy of the audience. In a live setting, the same recording can be a drone one minute and a percussive assault the next.

  • Looping: Creates instant percussive walls and evolving rhythmic beds.
  • FX Reshaping: Using distortion, reverb, and feedback to turn a nature recording into a harsh noise centerpiece.
  • Live Archive: Performing a set using only one sound recorded that very day - a radical constraint that forces deep exploration.
LIVE DIRECTIVE

One-Recording Set

Perform a 10-minute set using a single field recording. Use only effects (delay, EQ, reverb, pitch shift) to evolve the texture. No oscillators, no external synths. Let the environment be your only voice.


7. The Anatomy of Capture: Choosing Your Transducers

To record the world is to choose a new set of ears. In the RZRecords philosophy, we don't seek "perfection", we seek character. The gear you choose dictates the relationship you have with the environment. High-end equipment offers transparency, but DIY tools often offer a more radical, zoomed-in perspective on the "sonic matter."

  • Contact Microphones (Piezo): These are the stethoscopes of the noise world. By bypassing the air and recording vibrations directly from solid objects, bridge cables, resonant metal plates, or humming machinery, you uncover a subsonic world hidden from the human ear. It turns every surface into a playable instrument.
  • Hydrophones: The world sounds different under the surface. Hydrophones capture the metallic clicks of aquatic life and the haunting, muffled roar of passing ships. It is the ultimate tool for dislocation, stripping a sound of its terrestrial context.
  • Electromagnetic (EMF) Listeners: These aren't microphones in the traditional sense; they "listen" to the invisible fields emitted by routers, power lines, and phone screens. This is the ghost in the machine—the raw data of our digital infrastructure converted into harsh, rhythmic static.
  • Binaural Pairs: To capture Spatial Awareness, we use microphones worn in the ears. This replicates human hearing, creating a 3D "headspace" that makes the listener feel physically present in the recording. It is the most intimate form of sonic documentation.

8. Recorders: The Vessel for the Signal

The recorder is your archive’s gatekeeper. While the "best" recorder is the one you have with you, understanding the limits of your vessel allows you to push those limits intentionally. We categorize our gear by the intentionality of the hunt.

For stealth and serendipity, the smartphone is a valid tool, provided you use an app that bypasses internal compression. For high-fidelity "Deep Listening" missions, a dedicated Handheld Field Recorder (like a Zoom or Tascam) with XLR inputs allows for a lower noise floor, essential when you are recording the "Edge of Silence." If you are mining for 50Hz hums or delicate textures, a high bit-depth (24-bit or 32-bit float) is your best friend, as it prevents digital clipping when the world suddenly gets loud.

“Don't wait for a professional rig to start your archive. A cheap recorder pushed to its limits has more soul than a pristine capture of a boring moment.”

 

9. RZRecords Field Missions: The Hunter-Gatherer Protocol

To master this art, you must move from creator of sound to hunter and gatherer of acoustic artifacts. Use these directives to build your archive and sharpen your ears. Each mission is a doorway to radical listening.


FIELD DIRECTIVE

Mission: The Mechanical Pulse

Find a steady rhythm in a non-musical machine (HVAC, industrial washer, subway vent). Record 3 minutes close-up. Don’t just stand there; move the mic to find “ghost rhythms” - the accidental polyrhythms that emerge when you shift position.


FIELD DIRECTIVE I

Mission: The Geography of Sound

Record one specific location at 3 different times of day (04:00, 12:00, 22:00). Compare how the “sonic document” changes. Notice the absence of human signal at night, the density of birds at dawn. Every place has a circadian score.


FIELD DIRECTIVE II

Mission: Temporal Manipulation

Take a 1-second “found hit” (a car door, a hammer strike, a ceramic crack). In your DAW, stretch that 1 second into 60 seconds. Observe the micro-harmonics that emerge as reality is unfolded. Granular synthesis reveals hidden continents inside a transient.


FIELD DIRECTIVE III

Mission: The Edge of Silence

As John Cage proved, silence is never empty. Record “silence” in an empty room. Amplify the recording by 30dB and listen to the hidden floor of the world - the blood rush in your own ears, the distant rumble of infrastructure.


FIELD DIRECTIVE IV

Mission: Resonance Map

Find a resonant space (stairwell, underpass, concrete silo). Record a single impulse - a handclap or a click - and let the tail ring out. Use that natural reverb as the only effect on a sparse synth line. Let the architecture become the effect processor.


FIELD DIRECTIVE V

Mission: Stillness Drift

Set a recorder in a public space for 20 minutes without touching it. Do not monitor. Later, listen at double speed. Patterns of human movement, conversations, and machinery will reveal a hidden choreography. You are documenting the ghost of the crowd.


10. The Living Archive: Documentation as Discipline

You are not just "collecting sounds", you are building a personal sound library that serves as a unique fingerprint of the places you inhabit. However, a library without a catalog is just a pile of noise. To make your field recordings useful for composition, you must treat documentation with the same rigor as the recording itself.

Reflect back on your transducers (Section 7). A contact mic recording of a bridge needs to be labeled differently than a binaural recording of a forest. The former is a textural/percussive asset; the latter is a spatial/narrative one. When you organize your files, tag them by their Sonic Utility:

  • Drone/Tonal: Use this for EMF signals, the steady hum of industrial HVAC units, or distant highway drones. These are your harmonic foundations.
  • Transient/Impact: This is for sounds captured with contact microphones or high-gain handhelds, car doors, hammer strikes, or the snap of a frozen branch. These are your drum kits.
  • Spatial/Ecosystem: Reserve this for binaural and hydrophone captures where the space is the focus. These are your "reverb chambers" and atmospheric beds.

Document the metadata meticulously: location, time, weather, and your own state of mind. This data becomes the "score" when you later go to re-contextualize the sound. By knowing the exact conditions of a capture, you can better "collaborate" with that moment in the studio. A recording made during a thunderstorm has a different psychic weight than one made in a desert; your archive should respect that difference.


30-DAY CHALLENGE

The Signal Challenge

Record 1 sound per day for 30 days. No excuses. Everything is signal: the hum of your fridge, the squeak of a door, the distant freeway, a coin spinning on a table. By the end, you will have the raw material for a full-length release. Organize, tag, and revisit - you will hear your own evolution.


11. The Listener’s Ecosystem: Completing the Circle

On the listener side, this kind of music asks for a different kind of attention. You’re not following a chord progression or a hook; you’re moving through a sonic space, noticing how small events cluster and retreat. The same crackle or rumble that once felt like “noise” becomes a recurring motif. The way sound bounces off walls becomes spatial choreography. The absence of traditional musical signposts makes you more sensitive to the passage of time itself. In a way, the listener completes the composition by bringing their own associations, memories, and psychic weather to the playback.

This is why we say: distribution as composition. The environment where the work is heard - headphones on a rainy bus, speakers in a gallery, a phone speaker in a kitchen - becomes part of the final piece. No two listenings are identical. 


12. The RZRecords Philosophy: Everything Is Signal

Our mission has always been to push the boundaries of the “audible.” Whether it’s harsh wall noise, delicate hydrophone recordings, or the eerie resonance of an abandoned power station, the goal is the same: to challenge the hierarchy of sound. There is no such thing as “pure noise” - only un-contextualized sound. Field recordings are the most democratic proof of that idea: every wall, street, and machine is already broadcasting its own score, waiting for someone to hit record.

The first step is to stop filtering out the world. The second step is to treat what you capture as a valid source of music. The third step is to shape it with the same care you’d give to any instrument, knowing that the environment is not just a backdrop, but a co-composer. Next time you’re out with a portable recorder - or even just your phone - don’t just capture atmosphere. Capture scores. Capture rhythms. Capture collaborators. And when you bring them into the studio, remember: you’re not dumping “noise” into a track; you’re bringing the world into the mix.

“The world is performing a symphony of found sound 24/7. All you have to do is hit record and let the background become the foreground. Everything is signal.”

 


Why Split Releases Still Matter in Experimental and Noise Music (part two, sort of)

Why Splits Survive

Welcome to part two in The RZRecords Guide to Experimental Collaboration series, this time featuring case studies, a checklist, and the mistakes we made so you don’t have to.


Rzrecords and the Art of Splits
RZRecords and the Art of Splits

Split releases should have died years ago.

Too niche. Too fragmented. Too dependent on artists actually talking to each other.

And yet, they’re still here.

In experimental music, underground and indie, and obviously noise scenes, splits aren’t just tradition. They’re infrastructure.

Because this genre doesn’t evolve in isolation.

Put two artists or more on the same release and you don’t get balance, you get tension. Different approaches collide:

  • analog vs digital
  • structured vs improvised
  • minimal vs overwhelming

And somewhere in that clash, something new happens.

Recent splits are pushing this even further:
Noise layered with jazz improvisation. Drone interrupted by bursts of distortion. Ambient textures dissolving into pure signal decay.

Not clean. Not polished.

Good.

Because the moment this scene becomes predictable, it stops being relevant.

Splits prevent that.

They force unpredictability. They force interaction.

They remind everyone involved that this was never meant to be controlled.

So why haven’t splits gone extinct?

Simple. The same reason punk still has zines and black metal still has tape traders. Because the infrastructure isn’t about efficiency. It’s about belonging.

A split release is a handshake that leaves a paper trail. It’s proof that two weirdos found each other, agreed on something, and bothered to put it out into the world. In an era where anyone can upload a solo track to Bandcamp in ten minutes, a split says: I didn’t do this alone. And I didn’t want to.

That matters more than streams.

The myth of the solitary genius never really applied to noise anyway.

You think Merzbow built that wall alone? Sure, the name is one person. But listen close enough and you’ll hear the ghosts of collaborators, tape manipulators, live sound engineers who knew exactly which frequencies to push into red. Experimental music has always been a network. Splits just make the network visible.

And right now, the network is hungrier than ever.

Post-pandemic, post-platform-everything, artists are realizing that algorithms don’t love them back. But other artists might. A split isn’t just a release. It’s a mutual aid agreement. You promote my side, I promote yours. Your audience discovers my broken synthscapes. My audience falls into your feedback loop.

That’s not charity. That’s strategy with a soul.

Let’s talk about the elephant in the room: ego.

The original guide mentioned it. Let’s sit with it.

Every split has at least one moment where Artist A thinks their track should close the release because it’s “more final.” Or Artist B quietly resents that the other’s waveforms look louder on Bandcamp. Or someone asks, “Why did their track get shared by that blog and mine didn’t?”

It happens. It’s fine. The trick isn’t pretending ego doesn’t exist. It’s building a container that can hold it.

That’s why the “Gentleperson’s Agreement” from Part One isn’t just legal CYA. It’s emotional architecture. When everyone knows the rules upfront, who owns what, who gets paid how, who decides the running order, there’s less room for resentment to fester. The split becomes a collaboration instead of a custody battle.

What the best splits do that solo releases can’t.

They create dissonance of intention.

You know that feeling when a noise track ends and suddenly the silence feels like part of the album? Now imagine that silence being broken not by another track from the same artist, but by something completely alien. A jazz saxophone breathing in the wreckage. A folk sample cleaned up just enough to feel wrong. A field recording of rain that slowly reveals itself to be manipulated static.

That jarring shift isn’t a mistake. It’s the whole point.

A solo album, no matter how experimental, follows one brain. A split follows two. And when those two brains don’t think alike, when they actively refuse to blend, the listener becomes the mediator. You decide where the conversation goes. You feel the friction.

That’s active listening. That’s what streaming playlists can’t replicate.

So what’s next for splits?

More weird formats, probably. Not just A/B or interleaved, but releases where artists remix each other’s stems without telling each other which stems belong to whom. Splits that exist only as live recordings from two different continents, synced by latency and luck. Splits that are released as a single 45-minute track with no clear handoff, forcing listeners to find the seam themselves.

The tools are cheaper than ever. The barriers are lower than ever. The only thing stopping anyone from starting a split tomorrow is the courage to send that first awkward email.

And if RZRecords has proven anything over twenty years of herding feedback-loving cats, it’s this:

Someone out there is waiting for you to ask.

Recently we got an invite from Debopom Ghosh Must Be Killed, and we're working on that split right now. Last year we reached out to DEDDOM, and you should expect that one soon.
The former is from India and does blackened noise, the latter is Ukrainian and does conceptual progressive jazz-core. The best part about them, other than their music, is that they were tactful and considerate enough to follow up with us, do a welfare check once we lost touch, being persistent and accommodating, which is an incredibly rare combo.


Case Study C: The “Too Many Cooks” 5-Way Split

The Artists: Five harsh noise wall acts from three different time zones. All friends. All convinced it would be easy.

The Challenge: Nobody wanted to be first in the running order. Everybody wanted to be last. Also, one artist submitted a 90-second track. Another submitted 22 minutes. The imbalance was comical.

The RZR Solution: We abandoned the “equal track length” assumption entirely. Instead, we framed the split as “Five Interpretations of One Second of Sound”, a conceptual constraint that made the length disparity feel intentional. The 22-minute piece became the anchor; the 90-second bursts became palate cleansers.

Revenue Split: Weighted by track length, but with a twist: each artist could opt into a flat “solidarity rate” instead. Two chose solidarity. Three chose weighted. Everyone signed off without drama. 

Loss: This was a limited CDR run, and we sold all of them within a few days, thinking we'd make more. The hard drive died, we never backed anything up. There was only one mention of it online, a Swedish review, quite positive. The site is long gone. Everything can get lost to time and carelessness. 

Lesson: Don’t force symmetry. Turn your asymmetries into the concept. Back stuff up.

Case Study D: The “What Do You Mean You Already Released It” Disaster

The Artists: A dark ambient producer (let’s call them X) and a power electronics artist (Y). Both very  talented. Neither communicated well.

The Challenge: X rightly assumed the split was a “simultaneous release” on both artists’ Bandcamp pages plus the label page. Y interpreted the agreement differently. By the time we noticed, Y had already uploaded their side, with the split artwork, to their personal page. Three weeks early. Without telling anyone.

The RZR Solution: Damage control. We asked X to unpublish the early upload, push the date back, and re-upload with a “pre-order” tag instead of a live release. Everyone agreed, but the trust was cracked. The split still came out. It still got listens. But the vibe never recovered.

Lesson: Write down the exact release date. Write down where each artist can sell. Write down the embargo window. Assume nothing.

Common Split Mistakes (We Made All of These So You Don’t Have To)

Here’s the unglamorous truth. Splits fail more often than they succeed. Not because the music is bad, the music is almost always interesting. But because the human part breaks.

Avoid these.

1. The “We’ll Figure Out the Order Later” Mistake
You finalize the tracks. You master them. You send them to the duplication plant. And then you argue about who goes first.
Result: Someone feels like they “lost.” Even if the music is identical, running order signals status. Decide before anyone records a single note.

2. The “One Person Does All the Promotion” Mistake
Artist A is a natural self-promoter. Artist B is a hermit who hasn’t posted on social media since 2019. The split drops. Artist A posts daily. Artist B posts once, then disappears. Streams are 90/10.
Result: Resentment. Even if Artist B’s music is better, they didn’t show up. The fix? Agree on promotion minimums upfront. “Three posts per week. Two stories. One newsletter mention. Or we don’t release.”

3. The “Mastering to Please Both” Mistake
Artist A wants their side loud, crushed, and aggressive. Artist B wants dynamic range and silence between notes. The mastering engineer tries to find a middle ground. Everyone ends up unhappy.
Result: A split that sounds like two different albums glued together awkwardly. Better solution: master each side separately. Let the gap between them be the feature, not the bug.

4. The “No Expiration Date on the Agreement” Mistake
You release the split. A year passes. Two years. Artist B gets approached by a label wanting to re-release their side as part of a compilation. But the original split agreement didn’t say anything about re-releases. Artist A claims veto power. Lawyers get mentioned (briefly, cheaply, pathetically).
Result: Friendship over. Split pulled from platforms. Everyone loses.
Fix: Include a simple clause: “After 18 months, each artist may relicense their own material without restriction.” Clean. Fair. Future-proof.

5. The “Digital Only, But Actually We Want Tapes Now” Mistake
Halfway through the process, someone gets excited. “What if we did a limited run of cassettes?” Suddenly you’re researching duplication prices, J-card templates, and shipping costs to four countries.
Result: Delay. Scope creep. One artist drops out because they can’t afford their half of the tape run.
Fix: Decide the format before you announce the split. If you change your mind, do a second run later as a “special edition.” Don’t pivot mid-stream.


The One Mistake That’s Actually Fine

Thinking you need permission.

You don’t.

Every successful split in RZRecords history started with someone sending a message that felt slightly too forward. Slightly too vulnerable. “Hey, I like your work. Want to do something weird together?”

Sometimes the answer is no. Sometimes it’s silence.

But sometimes it’s yes. And that yes turns into a release that outlives both artists’ solo work, because splits aren’t just about the music. They’re about the record of two people finding each other in a fragmented, algorithm-driven world and saying: This mattered. This happened. We were here.


The RZRecords Split Release Checklist

Before you hit “send” on that message, run through this. Print it out. Tape it to your wall. Ignore it at your own peril.

Phase Task Done?
Concept Find an artist whose work clashes interestingly with yours. (Similar is fine. Tension is better.)
Concept Define a loose theme or constraint. (“Field recordings only.” “No editing allowed.” “Every track must include a door closing.”)
Logistics Agree on number of tracks per artist. Length? Optional.
Logistics Set a firm deadline for finished stems. Add a 2-week buffer. You’ll need it.
Legal Write the Gentleperson’s Agreement. Include: who owns what, non-exclusive license, re-release window (18 months recommended).
Legal Confirm sample clearance. That found sound from a YouTube video? Get permission or replace it.
Financial Choose your revenue split method: 50/50, weighted by track, or Bandcamp Friday direct-to-artist.
Financial Decide who pays for mastering, artwork, and (if physical) duplication. Split costs upfront.
Format Pick A/B side, interleaved, or collage method. Write down the running order.
Promotion Agree on minimum posts per artist per week. Designate a lead promoter (or rotate).
Promotion Set a simultaneous release date and time (UTC recommended for international splits).
The Exit Include an expiration clause. After X months, each artist can relicense their own work freely.

Checklist complete? Good. Now stop planning and start doing.

Q&A: What Artists Always Ask (But Are Afraid to Say Out Loud)

Q: What if my track is objectively worse than my partner’s?
A: First, “worse” isn’t real in experimental music. Different is real. Uncomfortable is real. But if you genuinely feel insecure, talk to your partner before the release. Most noise artists have been there. Some will even offer to remaster your side for free. Don’t let perfectionism kill a split. Release it messy. Release it honest. Release it now.

Q: Can I release a split with someone I’ve never met in person?
A: Absolutely. RZRecords has released splits between artists who only knew each other’s Bandcamp pages and a shared love for broken electronics. The digital handshake counts. Just be extra clear about expectations, no body language to read, no studio hang to smooth things over.

Q: What if my partner disappears halfway through?
A: It happens. Life gets loud sometimes. The polite move: send three check-in emails spaced two weeks apart. No response? Finish your side anyway, release it as a solo EP, and credit the split as “unfinished collaboration with [Artist Name], proceeds held for them if they ever return.” You keep the door open. You don’t wait forever.

Q: Do I need a label like RZRecords to do a split?
A: No. Labels help with distribution, mastering, and babysitting egos. But the purest splits are self-released. Two artists. One Bandcamp page (or two, linked together). A free download code for anyone who asks. That’s the original spirit. Labels are just scaffolding. The handshake is the real thing.

Q: How do I know if a split “worked”?
A: You’ll feel it. Not in streams or dollars. You’ll feel it when a stranger messages both of you saying, “I never would have found Artist B without this split, and now they’re my favorite thing.” That’s the metric. Audience crossover. Scene knitting. One weirdo introducing another weirdo to a third weirdo. Everything else is noise. (Pun intended.)

Q: What if I'm a newcomer or just completely unknown?
A: Go for it. Seriously, this might be your way to win a few hearts, get your sound out there, impress someone you think is out of your reach.

Q: One last thing, floppy disks?
A: We tried. We failed. Don’t. Or do, it's a weird format, maybe you're weird enough to make it, you do you!


Now go send that message.

Retrospective: Revisiting gaop & Haggari Nakashe's Pictures of Gold and Terror (2006)

~20 Years of RZRecords, a Retrospective

Revisiting Haggari Nakashe & gaop's Pictures of Gold and Terror (2006)

45 tracks of noise rock, grindcore, free jazz, and Japanoise (inspired) madness, and what twenty years did (and didn’t) change


Pictures of Gold and Terror by Haggari Nakashe & gaop
Pictures of Gold and Terror

In the mid-2000s, the underground DIY scene was a wild west of file-sharing and CD-R trades. Blogs were the gatekeepers, forums were the community, and “going viral” meant someone posted your album on a Blogspot page that got 400 hits or mentioned you on Myspace. In the middle of this productive chaos, an unlikely partnership formed between Haggari Nakashe, a Canadian-Japanese artist who at the time had been quietly terrorizing local noise shows in Montreal and Osaka simultaneously, and gaop, a Eurasian multi-instrumental experimentalist. Their 2006 collaborative effort, Pictures of Gold and Terror, remains one of the most polarizing and fascinating relics of that era’s extreme music underground, a record that fused jazz improvisation, noise rock aggression, Japanoise abstraction, and grindcore brutality into something that carelessly defied every category it borrowed from.

Twenty years later, it’s worth asking: what does it mean that this album still exists, still circulates, and still sounds like its own unique thing? And what does it mean that gaop and Haggari Nakashe are still at it?


The 45-Track Gauntlet: DIY Grindcore Meets Jazz Abstraction

Pictures of Gold and Terror is an exercise in hyper-compression. It features a staggering 45 tracks, most of which clock in at under a minute. The artists famously describe×’ it as “extreme music for people with a short attention span”, a statement that feels almost eerily prophetic in today’s era of algorithmic playlists and bite-sized content, but was purely an avant-garde provocation back in ‘06.

The genre DNA here is now-all-too-familiar, although at the time some still considered it genuinely unusual. Grindcore provides the blast-beat skeleton; noise rock provides the abrasive muscle; free jazz supplies the improvisational nervous system; and noise runs underneath everything like a low-level electrical hum that occasionally surges into the foreground and shorts the whole circuit. It’s a combination that had precedent: John Zorn’s Naked City had been doing something adjacent since the late 80s, colliding jazz harmony with hardcore aggression and noise in short, violent bursts, but gaop and Haggari Nakashe pushed the formula into weirder, more playful territory than Zorn’s downtown-NY seriousness typically allowed.

RZRecords was itself a product of that specific cultural moment: at the time it just shifted from a one-person operation run out of a cluttered apartment into a duo doing the same out of two homes, months before adding a third friend to the mix to handle things more professionally, but then still pressing CD-Rs in batches of 50, stuffing them into hand-stamped envelopes, and mailing them to strangers who’d traded email and snail mail addresses on message boards. At its peak it released something like 30 albums in two years, most of which vanished without a trace. Pictures of Gold and Terror was the exception, the one that kept getting rediscovered, passed around, re-uploaded after link rot swallowed the original sites and files.

Twenty years on, RZRecords has transformed in the way that only the most stubborn DIY labels can: it hasn’t scaled up so much as it’s formalized its own weirdness. The CD-Rs are mostly gone, replaced by streaming platforms, Bandcamp pages and occasional limited releases. But the ethos, release anything interesting, charge almost nothing, make no concessions to accessibility, remains intact. In an era when “DIY” has been co-opted as an aesthetic by labels with real marketing budgets, RZRecords' commitment to genuine obscurity feels less like a limitation and more like a principled stance.

The track list still reads like a fever dream, a scrambled broadcast from a parallel dimension where half-melted melodies argue with ghosts of forgotten genres, and every title feels like an inside joke whispered by a synth that remembers your nightmares:

“Skin a Friend To Get Free Stuffing”
“Wall Volcano Wallkanoo”
“A Jaw As Big As a Garage”
"Please Give Me a Second Helping of Rocks"
"Sausages Made of Hands"
"Starving in the Name of Porn"

The “Hummable” Paradox: Noise Music That Gets Stuck in Your Head

Despite its roots in powerviolence, noise drones, and avant-garde grindcore, Pictures of Gold and Terror has a bizarre secret: it’s often surprisingly melodic. The Bandcamp description still claims 90% of the tracks are “hummable,” and while that sounds like a joke, there is a real grain of truth to it.

The album employs a relentless bait-and-switch tactic. A track might open with a “cute” or pleasant synth melody or a funky, Haggari's slapped bass guitar riff, a gaop OG Casio keyboard signature,  only to be violently interrupted by a blast of noise or a jagged grindcore transition. The result is something like “kawaii-noise” meets “scum-punk”: a sonic prank that keeps the listener in a constant state of brain whiplash.

This tension between melody and destruction had been explored before, but rarely with this particular flavour. Melt-Banana had been threading pop hooks through noise-punk shrapnel since the mid-90s. FantĂ´mas, Mike Patton’s film-score-meets-grindcore project, whose 2001 self-titled debut carved up genre in similar short-burst fashion, was doing something structurally related, though with a cinematic grandeur that Pictures of Gold and Terror deliberately refuses. Closer in spirit was perhaps the work of Ruins, the Japanese duo who spent the 90s running progressive rock structures through hardcore filters with a similarly absurdist sensibility. What gaop and Haggari Nakashe added to this lineage was the jazz element: not jazz as decoration, but free-jazz as infrastructure, the improvisational logic that determined when a melody was allowed to breathe and when it would be ambushed.

“Extreme music for people with a short attention span.” — Haggari Nakashe & gaop on Pictures of Gold and Terror

What’s striking, revisiting this in 2026, is how much the broader culture has unconsciously caught up to this structure without acknowledging it. The internet trained an entire generation to process radical tonal shifts in seconds, the ironic pivot, the bait-and-switch thumbnail, the meme that starts cute and ends in chaos. Pictures of Gold and Terror was doing this as deliberate artistic provocation. Whether that makes it ahead of its time or simply unlucky, arriving just a tiny bit before the world had the language to appreciate it, probably depends on how generous you’re feeling.

Haggari Nakashe & gaop, never seemed particularly interested in being vindicated. their output since 2006 has continued along the same perverse trajectory: melodic ideas deployed as traps, accessibility used as a weapon. If anything, their recent work has doubled down on the free-jazz mixed into noise punk rock playfulness, leaning further into the “cartoony” end while keeping the trapdoor of extreme noise always one bar away.

The Noise and Jazz-Noise Lineage: Where Pictures of Gold and Terror Fits

The album’s DNA is deeply tied to the Japanoise and Japanese Noise Rock schools. With Haggari Nakashe’s background, the influence of bands like The Boredoms, Melt-Banana, and Hanatarash is undeniable, but so is a broader tradition of jazz-noise collision that was particularly fertile in the 90s and early 2000s.

Structure. Like the “ADHD” arrangements of Osaka’s noise scene, the songs don’t develop; they explode and disappear. This is a direct inheritance from artists like Masonna and Solmania, who treated duration itself as a form of aggression, why spend four minutes on something you can detonate in thirty seconds?

The Jazz Thread. The free-jazz influence puts the album in conversation with a specific 90s/00s lineage of artists who refused to keep jazz and noise in separate rooms. Zu, the Italian noise-jazz trio who emerged in the late 90s, were building a similar bridge, saxophone brutalism colliding with post-hardcore rhythms. US Maple were doing something adjacent from a more art-rock angle, using jazz’s rhythmic displacement to make rock music feel physically unstable. Borbetomagus had been fusing free jazz with pure noise even earlier, back in the 80s, but their influence was particularly felt in the 90s underground that gaop and Haggari Nakashe were clearly absorbing. All of these artists shared an instinct: that jazz’s improvisational logic and grindcore’s physical aggression were not opposites but natural co-conspirators.

The Slap. The use of the bass as a percussive, almost cartoony lead instrument adds a layer of surrealism rarely found in Western grindcore. This is where the jazz influence becomes most audible, the bass behaving less like a rhythm instrument and more like a soloist with a chaotic, bebop-inflected disregard for where the beat is supposed to land. This is years and years before they add woodwinds into their arsenal.

Haggari Nakashe’s own evolution over the two decades since is worth noting here. Where gaop has remained relatively prolific and consistent, Nakashe went through a long period of near-silence in the early 2010s, moving back to Japan, working outside music entirely, before re-emerging around 2017 with a series of solo noise and drone releases that felt like a direct continuation of Pictures of Gold and Terror’s most unhinged moments, as though the intervening decade had been compressed and fired out all at once. The collaboration between them resumed quietly, without announcement, in the way that real creative partnerships tend to: not with a reunion press release, but with a new file appearing in a shared folder.

The Japanoise lineage itself has shifted in the world’s perception. What was once genuinely underground, physically inaccessible, requiring real effort to find, is now a popular genre, few search terms away. That democratization is mostly good, and yet something about the friction of the original discovery mattered. The people who found extreme music, or Pictures of Gold and Terror in 2006 found it through effort. The people who find it now find it through an algorithm serving up “if you liked this, try…” It’s the same album. It hits differently.

A Legacy of the Weird: What 20 Years of RZRecords Tells Us About DIY Experimental Music

Looking back twenty years later, Pictures of Gold and Terror stands as a testament to the longevity of niche creative bonds, and unexpected  friendships, and to the specific kind of stubbornness required to make genuinely uncommercial art across three continents for two decades.

What Hasn’t Changed

  • The music itself. Its refusal to be palatable.
  • The gaop & Haggari Nakashe collaboration, still active.
  • RZRecords' commitment to releasing music that ignores rules and discoverability.
  • The album’s ability to sound abrasive, funny, and genuinely strange.

What Has Changed

  • The CD-R economy, blogs, and forums, they're all gone.
  • The underground is bigger, more visible, easily accessible, harder to define.
  • Jazz-noise-grindcore is now taught in music schools.
  • Streaming hosts the album but algorithmically buries it, often hoping you'd pay to make it visible.


Imagine if the internet had no algorithm, no recommendations, no safety net, just a billion random pages built by strangers with too much free time and zero design training. That was the 00s web. Instead of apps, you had Geocities shrines: personal websites so aggressively ugly they looped back around to beautiful, plastered with animated flames, visitor counters, and MIDI files that ambushed your speakers the second a page loaded. No mute button. No skip. Just whatever song some stranger decided you needed to hear.

Finding music like Pictures of Gold and Terror meant someone went genuinely hunting for it, digging through dead forum threads, copy-pasting sketchy URLs, watching a ZIP file unpack at a speed so slow you could make a sandwich between each percentage point. And if someone in your house picked up the phone mid-download, it killed your connection entirely. No autosave. Start over. The chaos wasn't a bug, it was the whole experience, and somehow that made the payoff feel enormous.

Today's internet is frictionless by design: everything is findable, streamable, and served to you based on what you already like. That's genuinely useful. But something got lost when discovery stopped feeling like discovery. When every niche got a subreddit, every obscure genre got a Spotify playlist, and every weird corner of the web got smoothed into a content category. The old internet was a place you could genuinely and easily get lost in, and losing yourself in it, stumbling onto something strange and perfect and completely unasked for, felt like finding a secret that the algorithm will never be able to fake.

Extreme music was out there, sure, this was way after the initial black metal waves, Japanese punk becoming harsh noise and decades after classical composers and jazz experimentalist went chaotic, all in existence, in the back racks of record stores brave enough to stock it, and scattered across the early internet in forgotten forum threads and sketchy ZIP files, lurking on file-sharing sites. But finding it still meant looking for it: following a thread, trusting a stranger's recommendation, disappearing down a rabbit hole with no algorithm to catch you. The discovery was part of the point.

The deeper question Pictures of Gold and Terror poses in 2026 is whether “extreme” still means anything at all. Loudness is ubiquitous. Weirdness has been aestheticized into a brand. Short attention spans have been validated by an entire industrial complex. And yet this album still manages to feel abrasive and strange and funny in a way that most calculated “weird” music doesn’t, because it was made by two people who genuinely didn’t care whether it landed, for a label that never expected it to travel, in a moment when none of the current incentive structures existed to reward legibility.

For those who missed it in 2006, Pictures of Gold and Terror is a time capsule of a moment when “extreme” didn’t just mean loud, it meant weird, funny, and unexpectedly catchy, with a jazz bassline running underneath the wreckage. For those returning to it now, it’s something rarer: proof that the things made without ambition sometimes outlast everything made with it.

In that sense, Pictures of Gold and Terror is less an album than a behavioral experiment conducted on anyone foolish enough to press play. It is music for people who think normal song structure is a polite suggestion, for listeners who enjoy being emotionally ambushed by a bassline, and for archivists of the absurd who still believe a record can be both comically overstuffed and genuinely principled. Twenty years on, it remains gloriously resistant to explanation: too melodic to dismiss as pure chaos, too chaotic to be mistaken for melody, and too self-aware to ever fully surrender to either category. It is the rare work that can sound like a joke and a manifesto at the same time, which is probably why it survives, not because it makes sense, but because it refuses to stop making trouble.

And maybe that is the real legacy of RZRecords: a catalog built like a dare, maintained like a habit, and remembered like a prank that accidentally became an institution. In a world where every release is supposed to be optimized, tagged, clipped, pre-promoted, playlisted, and pre-approved by invisible machines in distant rooms, RZRecords still behaves like a label run by people who would rather mail a CD-R to a stranger than explain themselves to an algorithm. That kind of commitment is almost tender in its own derangement. It says: here is something too weird, too loud, too specific, and too alive to be useful, which is exactly why it matters.

This text was written and HTML coded by Ben Zarik and fact-checked and edited by Haggari Nakashe & gaop to strip out false grandeur, minimize embarrassment, and generally prevent the whole thing from getting too self-important, which would be deeply on-brand and still pretty weird.



In the Press: Paxit / DEDDOM Split Featured at Machine Music

Ahead of the upcoming split release, Ron Ben-Tovim over at Machine Music has published a massive feature interview with Andrii from DEDDOM ...