Re: [microsound] the medium, the large and the extra large

[Michal Seta <mis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

on 8/1/01 10:39 PM, anechoic at kim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>> The medium is the transmitter (as to 'transmit' signifies not only
>> 'sending', but also 'pass on' / 'conduct' / 'mediate' ...), as follows
>> from a)+b) ... -- of sound, for instance, hence a message / signal in
>> form of some physical (e.g., sound waves) / chemical process, being
>> carried by a physical / chemical medium (air, for example, or a CD,
>> where sonic information is stored in form of microscopic 'pits',
>> representing the digital signal in 14/16-digit binary combinations ...).
> 
> you might want to read up on some information theory to get a better
> understanding of the terms: medium, message and transmitter...you seem to
> have your wires crossed ;)
> 


hehe.
Looks like the discussion is getting a bit out of hand.

My observation:
In order to discuss some "microsound" issues, especially the extra-musical
ones, one needs to be well informed and have read up a good deal of material
on information theory (and perhaps other non-musical elements of life -
depending whatever comes our way).  Which is fine.  I, too, support the
concept of a person who has a good understanding of things one talks about.

On the other hand,  I have been on this list for a while and noticed on a
few occasions that discussions about musical elements of music(s) are
carried by both those who definitely know and are well informed and those
who might benefit from a bit more information on the subject.  And that
doesn't bother anyone.


What gives?

-- Not trying to start another rant/flame war ---


../MiS