Re: [microsound] failure

[richard chartier <chartier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>
>i feel just the opposite.. about sound quality, that is... i think a
>THIN sound is nice.. but, that's my opinion, of course, as well... i
>use very small, thin, cold sounds in my music.. i like the space that
>it gives...
>
>but i do agree with you in that SOUND itself is the key ingredient..


i agree that sound is the key... with audio work that is "micro" in nature
the focus should (in my opinion) be on the qualities of the sounds and
their interactions... if it is just one sound it must be "fascinating"
(subjective term) enough to capture my attention or perhaps confuse it ; )

i always use the analogy of working on an abstract (or in my case
non-objective) painting... since this work lacks a  narrative in the
traditional sense it relies on its materials and composition to succeed...

my problem is always... when is it complete.. or done...
(but i guess the answer to that is when you finish it or happy with it)
haha ; )


richard


r   i   c   h   a   r   d   c   h   a   r   t   i   e   r

..   painting   .   sound    .   design   .

chartier@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.visionload.com/rchartier

FUTURE
"3particles" on lowercase compilation [bremsstrahlung, usa] 2CD, jan 2000
"un.entitled" CD, 2000

NOW
8 tracks on tool compilation [microwave, netherlands] 7" with lockgrooves/CD
spec. (with taylor deupree) [12k, usa] CD
a hesitant fold [meme, japan]  CD
0/r (with nosei sakata/*0) [12k, usa] CD


--Boundary_(ID_cd8nSikZgDIp9vcq5FrBzQ)
Content-Type: message/rfc822; Name="Re: [microsound] failure"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit