Re: [microsound] input + software = output

[Kenric McDowell <jrvarsity@xxxxxxx>]

 input + software = output = input + software = output= input + software =
output....

Kenric McDowell

ADSR@xxxxxxx wrote:

> In a message dated 11/15/99 7:01:54 PM, m@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>
> << > >input + software = output....
> >
> <<but to me the key was what I
> decided to do with the "output." If it worked it was not simply because
> the correct button was pushed...>>
>
> I think this is important, and would especially apply to found sound/ chance
> pieces.
> I think the majority of this "music" derives itself more from aesthetics of
> the art world than the conventions of the music world.
> Therefore the important part lies in what the artist does with the "output."
> Or how the artist presents it(e.g. Duchamps "Ready-mades").  Unfortunately,
> this doesn't seem to be accepted by the visual arts community on any regular
> basis,  why?   When was the last time "Art History" included the sound works
> of L. Russolo, Cage, Xenakis, Stockhausen, Schwitters...etc?  It's generally
> overlooked, were these works any less revolutionary because they weren't
> visual?
> The primary difference I see is that sound pieces lack the physical
> obect(trophy?) giving one obj
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> website: http://www.microsound.org