[-empyre-] Wednesday, 18th: Sound Art, Technology and Innovation

Thu Jun 19 15:55:28 EST 2014

This is in response to Anna's question:

I have not been on juries that deal strictly with sound art but my 
experience on Canadian visual arts peer evaluation has generally 
addressed the category of artistic merit to weigh more heavily on the 
conceptual and content side than what I would call the formal side 
(technical finesse as innovation). I'm curious as to what you are 
thinking of in terms of problematizing the term "innovation". Do you 
feel sound artists have become slaves to their own technology? Is it 
paradoxical that such an avant garde format is actually less 
conceptually and critically focused because of a reliance on more 
complex technology? It seems a far cry from the era of early video art 
for example where visual artists had much more freedom and I feel 
innovation with their media because of its directness and low level of 
technology.

On 14-06-18 3:08 PM, Christoph Cox wrote:
> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>
>
> Questions about technology (about sonic production, recording, 
> circulation, etc.) surely have some importance in the consideration of 
> sonic (and any other) art. But I confess that, as a critic and 
> philosopher, I almost entirely tune out when the conversation 
> (especially among artists) turns to gear and tools rather than 
> sensual/conceptual content. Factual talk about gear too often 
> substitutes for the more difficult and, to my mind, infinitely more 
> important, talk about aesthetic and historical value. Take, for 
> example, /Leonardo Music Journal/. Though I serve on the journal's 
> editorial board, I'm rarely interested in the essays, which so often 
> concern the "how?" instead of the "why?".
>
> This is relevant to Anna's question: In my experience, grants and 
> academic positions so often seem to go not to the most interesting or 
> important artists (by my lights, of course) but to much less 
> interesting artists who can tell a story about their "innovative" use 
> of hardware and software.
>
>
> On 6/18/14, 10:43 AM, Paul Dolden wrote:
>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> First,I like to thank Jim for inviting me, and have greatly enjoyed 
>> the discussion so far.
>>
>>
>> Well I will start today, since I have not participated yet.( I am 
>> responsible for question #2, about opera using recorded signals.
>> N.B. "my question" was more a joke i sent out to alot of friends with 
>> some sarcastic comment about concert hall practice and its 
>> contemporary relevance.)
>>
>> If you look at the many comments for the New York Times article, 
>> people are scandalized that an opera company would think of using 
>> samples to replace the orchestra to keep costs down. One thinks 
>> immediately of Foucault's discussion of authenticity in the arts. But 
>> I do not want to go in that direction please. As much as I would like 
>> to discuss that the depth of Wagners' timbres are not possible with 
>> the Vienna Symphonic library in which all instruments were recorded 
>> with the same small diaphragm microphones, which creates bad phasing 
>> when huge densities of instruments are used. I will repress the gear 
>> geek in me and proceed.
>>
>> The story, of the opera,  came out while reading last week's highly 
>> theoretical discussions, which were amazing, but left me still 
>> thinking that we as cultural workers have created almost no shift in 
>> how people think about the art of sound reproduction and music 
>> consumption.
>> For your average person recordings are their experience of music. 
>> They consume recordings in their car, home and office. If they are 
>> walking down the street and are not wearing ear buds, they are 
>> confronted with street musicians, most of whom are jamming to a 
>> pre-recorded tape!
>>
>> By contrast when we try to interest the public in just listening 
>> whether in the art gallery or concert hall with nothing to see, 
>> people think they are being "ripped off." And yet our use of 
>> technology is far more interesting and subtle than the new Celion 
>> Dion album. (n.b. and please: "nothing to see"-I am thinking of more 
>> than  electroacoutic music and its diffusion ideas!-even though i 
>> live in Quebec!)
>>
>> Where do we go from here, in making the audio format, (which may or 
>> may not involve some type of live performance) to be more understood 
>> and appreciated for your average person?
>>
>> Or to put the question in even simpler terms,and make it 
>> personal....(indulge me for a moment, the people who know me at this 
>> forum know my dry wit):
>> Why can i always interest and amaze your average person with my 
>> guitar wanking, than the extreme detailed work i have to do to mix 
>> and project 400 tracks of sound?
>> ............
>>
>>
>>
>> For bio, music excerpts, recordings,reviews etc go to:
>>
>> http://www.electrocd.com/en/bio/dolden_pa/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> To see a video of a chamber orchestra work go to:
>>
>> http://vimeo.com/channels/575823/72579719
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 9:29:12 AM, Jim Drobnick 
>> <jim at displaycult.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi Folks,
>> Yesterday's questions about sound in its cultural context didn't seem 
>> to gain much traction with the group -- or were there comments that 
>> didn't get through? If the former was the case, then we'll move on to 
>> the next topic, which is Sound Art, Technology and Innovation. Ryan 
>> Diduck, Paul Dolden, Anna Friz and Lewis Kaye have offered questions 
>> that address the influence of technology on sound art production, 
>> along with the pressures of artists themselves to develop new 
>> technologies.
>> *1) Ryan Diduck*: What is the relationship between users and 
>> innovations? This is an important question to consider for music 
>> making, as well as its reproduction. How are sound or music 
>> technologies -- such as formats like LPs and MP3s, or instruments 
>> like pianos and electronic synthesizers -- and their users mutually 
>> produced? To what extent do users stimulate technological 
>> innovations, or vice versa, in the sonic realm?
>> *2) Paul Dolden*: Why do cultural workers have so little impact on 
>> introducing the use of technology into the field of art music? Such 
>> as the incident of opera musicians being replaced by a digital 
>> orchestra recently reported in the NY Times: 
>> http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/12/arts/music/a-digital-orchestra-for-opera-purists-take-and-play-offense.html?emc=eta1
>> *3) Anna Friz*: Artists working with sound are judged by many of the 
>> same criteria as media artists when it comes to applying to various 
>> funding bodies, festivals, prizes and awards, and so on. Of these, to 
>> my mind the most contentious condition is that the work must be 
>> innovative. What counts as innovation for sound and audio art? Too 
>> often 'innovation' is still framed in terms of technical development 
>> and mastery, where techné is understood operationally rather than 
>> relationally and aesthetically. This can be the case whether the 
>> sound works in question use extensive multi-channel systems, 
>> self-made software, or DIY instruments. I am interested to 
>> problematize this focus on innovation, both in terms of working with 
>> sound technologies and in terms of how it effects the sound art 
>> scene, the kind of work that is programmed or supported and where.
>> *4) Lewis Kaye**: *What is the status of an audio artwork when the 
>> actual sonic aesthetics of the piece are contingent on the technical 
>> system used to reproduce it? Is the technical system thus an integral 
>> element in the audio art work?**
>> If Ryan, Paul, Anna or Lewis would like to further elaborate, please do!
>> Best,
>> Jim
>>
>> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au <mailto:empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> empyre forum
>> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20140619/bfbee7f6/attachment.htm>