Re: [microsound] AE_thingy: more points

[philippe petit <philippe-petit@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> I implied earlier that Autechre was using a Kyma system...I could be wrong

hello
on the Kyma site there is a list of records using the software and the AE's
peel session is among those, so they use it...



> trying to do
> so would be like a web designer trying to view a Flash enabled web page
> without ever thinking about how Flash was used to create the content they
> were viewing...again, the tool has become the message...

Probably if you are a sound-designer listening to music, so this is the way
you approach it but please Kim this can't and certainly doesn't have to be
imposed to everyone


>
> I think applying Oliveros' 60's hippy third ear mode of (deep) listening to
> digital music is like being near-sighted and trying to look at artwork
> without wearing glasses...

Well that was just a way to mention that categorization, theorization isn't
the best thing to do.
I often look at paintings, or artwork without wearing glasses and I like the
blurred way of it... It is a change and in any form of art I do not wish to be
said how I am to perceive it. The way it moves me matters.




> contrary to what she terms "Deep Listening" real
> deep listening today means being culturally able to read a soundwork fully
> by being aware of the process that went into making it...digital music
> calls into action an entirely different perceptual apparatus...without that
> you're just superficially listening to "cool sounds" ie you're missing out
> on the abstractions, pointers and cues inherent in digital media by not
> having a historical/technological context with which to frame the
> work...microscopic music needs a "microscope" to read it properly...

well my microscope are my ears, rather than my brain but in any case as I said
above I wouldn't dare saying what is best for people. Listen to music the way
you wish, as long as it is sincere it will have an effect.



> this
> microscopic mode (via new perceptual apparatus) of listening is vastly
> different than what Oliveros alludes to...it's a "fast brain" mode of
> listening which is needed to succesfully navigate the information
> rich/overloaded/quick cut/simulacre/realityTV mediascape we're immersed
> in...deep listening ala Oliveros is an attempt to separate the signifier
> from the signified (or listening from categorizing) and is an anachronistic
> mode of listening that doesn't work with electronica...electronica operates
> on fast production and consumption cycles and "speed listening" is how one
> tends to ingest it: as sound-bites, needle drops and
> wallpaper...soundtracks, commericials, on tv, layered, beat-matched and
> mixed into dancefloors, during the daily commute, in a store while
> shopping, while at work, while online, etc..today we absorb information via
> viral transmission not via soft focus new-age listening...
>

well that description sounds more like mass-listening so beware of the
indigestion.
And also when I want to listen to a record, I mean really listen to a record,
I am not doing anything else while I listen to it. That is the best way to
understand, feel all its subtleties, especially with minimal/micro music.
When I listen to a record while working, and this happens often because I work
a lot, the perception is different, obviously environment and present activity
is involved and my mind is distracted. Which doesn't mean I can't appreciate a
record, it is just another way of doing so. Anyway, I wouldn't theorize upon
the way one should appreciate or listen to music and I wish everyone a good
time with their records.
philippe


<--------------------------------------------------------------------->

                    http://www.bip-hop.com
            unconventional sound adventures,
          adventurous & creative electronica...

<--------------------------------------------------------------------->