Hamburg-based trumpeter and composer Michel Schroeder introduces Rokost, a project that marks a clear shift from his earlier acoustic and large-ensemble work toward a more groove-driven, electronically shaped sound. Built around a collective approach and a consciously raw aesthetic, the band brings together synthesizers, effects, and acoustic improvisation in a setting that prioritises energy, immediacy, and interaction.
In this interview, Schroeder reflects on the desire to reinvent his musical language and the role of groove in creating a more direct connection with audiences. He discusses the balance between composition and collective reinterpretation, the importance of developing a unique electronic sound from scratch, and the evolving identity of a band that continues to reshape its material through performance. What emerges is a project defined less by genre than by process—open-ended, collaborative, and driven by a search for something immediate and alive.
1. Rokost feels like quite a departure from your earlier acoustic and large-ensemble work. What initially pushed you towards this more groove-driven, electronically shaped sound world?
I think the main reason for me to found this project was my need to always reinvent myself and my music. After working a couple of years with an acoustic jazz quintet and my large ensemble, I really wanted to work with a project that’s really groove orientated. Plus, I wanted to make music that’s easier to apprehend and for some reason, I always found groove and electronic music to be that way. The music is still somehow based on the jazz literature, but framed in a groove construct. Somehow, this project makes it easier for me to connect with the audience, and that’s something I always wished for.
2. The band’s identity seems to sit somewhere between composition and collective reinterpretation. When you bring in a new piece, how much of it survives once the group has worked on it together?
The melody and the harmony mostly always survives, but we often change the arrangement of it, add some more solo spots or think of a new way to end or begin the songs. When I first started writing for this group, I tried to control nearly every aspect of the music, since I was used to doing so with my large ensemble. But I soon realized, that the outcome gets more interesting, when I leave more parts open for interpretation. The compositions that I made for Rokost in the last few months are becoming more sketch-like, something to work on with the band.
3. You’ve described the music as “structured yet uncompromising.” How do you balance clarity in the writing with the unpredictability that comes from improvisation?
Most of the time, I structure the songs into sections where we play „the head“ and sections, where somebody is soloing. Just like in traditional jazz songs. And in „the head“ at least some of the band members have very clear parts to play that are written by me, while others have more freedom to improvise.
4. The name Rokost suggests something raw and unprocessed. Was that idea already present in the music from the start, or did it emerge as the band developed?
I think the idea was always a big part of the concept of the band, but the band wasn’t called Rokost from the beginning. I had a lot of ideas what to call this project, at our first concert we were actually announced as „Bitcoin Billionaire“. I thought that name would be funny but none of the other band members actually liked it 🙂 The name Rokost then came from a brainstorming in a rehearsal break.
5. Unlike many projects that blend jazz and electronics, you’ve avoided presets and built your own sounds from scratch. What does that approach give you creatively that off-the-shelf sounds wouldn’t?
During the process of developing own sounds I get a lot of non-technical ideas for the music and how I could use those sounds in an actual composition. I also think, that this approach makes the sound of the band very unique, which is something I’m quite proud of!
6. Marta Winnitzki’s synthesizers and Leon Saleh’s use of FX play a central role in shaping the band’s sound. How do you approach integrating electronics without losing the immediacy of acoustic interaction?
In my opinion, acoustic interaction and electronics can work together quite well! The musicians only need to acknowledge, that they are not longer playing a piano and that a synthesizer is actually a different instrument. I could never work with a traditional jazz-pianist who has never before use a synthesizer, even if the person would be an outstanding jazz musician and could play all the parts. Even though a synth and a piano look quite similar, they are very different instruments, if you want to play a synth, you need to practice a lot on this particular instrument.
7. The trumpet is often associated with a very traditional jazz language. How have you adapted your own playing to sit within this more electronic, textural environment?
I actually don’t really feel a difference in my playing when I play traditional music or when I play with Rokost. For me, the same elements make both things sound „good“, for example melody development or timing.
8. There’s a strong sense of physical energy in the music, almost drawing from club culture as much as jazz. How important is that connection to rhythm and movement for you?
Although I don’t have a lot of experience with the club culture, this is very important for me. Like mentioned earlier, I always wanted to make music, that connects with the audience, and making music, that suggests movement seems to make that easier for me.
9. You’ve brought together musicians from quite different musical backgrounds. What was it about this particular line-up that made it feel like the right group for this project?
I’ve worked with Christian and Leon in different contexts before and I somehow knew that they would be the right call for the job. I listened to Marta play at a concert and I felt from her first note, that she would be the right fit. I think it’s something about the way they all interpret written music that makes them the right people for this group.
10. The album was recorded after the band had already begun performing live. How important was it to capture that live energy in the studio, rather than constructing something more polished?
Very important! I think, that every jazz band sounds better in a live context than in the studio. And I feel that especially with this group. With a project like this, it would be quite typical to have a recording process with a lot of overdubbing, but we recorded every song in a live setting, meaning, we played together all the time.
11. Rokost doesn’t feel like a typical “fusion” project. Was it important for you to avoid that label, and if so, why?
I never really thought about this, but somehow the word „fusion“ describes a different kind of music for me. Although being groove orientated the project is still a jazz-band, and I have the feeling, that making it a fusion-band, would be the little step over the edge. But I’m quite sure that this just stupid feeling and not true in any way. I dont really believe in all those made up genre labels, if somebody likes our music and wants to call it fusion, I’m totally fine with that!
12. Finally, as the band continues to evolve, do you see Rokost as an open-ended project, or do you have a clear sense of where you’d like to take the sound next?
Right now, the band is as open-ended as possible and evolving all the time. And that’s what makes it the most fun!
