microsonic materialism

[mitchell whitelaw <mitchell@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

i have a proto-theory (more of a hunch) which i'd like to put to the
list. it concerns a metaphor which is drawing lots of support among
microsound / glitch / post-digital / experimental electronic
music-makers and listeners:

seems that here, digital sound is figured a kind of _matter_. of course
digital audio is "material" for the music-makers (it's stuff they make
stuff with), but it seems that often artists and reviewers talk about
this music in terms of physical, substantial matter... and in particular
a sense of microscopic or atomic matter: grains, dust, liquids,
polymers, the noises of brownian motion...

this comes out in kim c's "residualism", and also in his recent post
about "glitches"... of course a glitch is an event which gets us close
to the matter of the medium (like a record pop or even pole's infamous
waldorf-crackles). the metaphor is also rife in tools and technologies:
granular synthesis (possibly the key microsonic technique?) and terrain
synthesis are two examples. it also comes out in "data music" like eM,
which sonifies digital information (we're hearing the substance of that data)...

what do you think? i'm after nice examples of microsonic materialism but
also really good counter-examples, anything that makes this idea look
wrong, obvious or overstated. 

*note* as well as making conversation, i should confess that i'm picking
your collective brains for a reason: i'm giving a presentation/paper on
this topic at an upcoming event here in sydney. i promise i'll cite you
properly, and if you're nice i'll plug your latest release. 

cheers,

mitchell whitelaw ::::::: http://www.spin.net.au/~mitchellw