Re: [microsound] [ot] RGB freq?

[xterminal@xxxxxxxxxxx]

> this promethean attitude is useful for science, but maybe damaging for art.

Permit me to ask for clarification? I think I see what you're getting at, you 
just put it ten miles differently from how I would have. Riffing on McLuhan's 
The Medium is the Message? As in, when the message overrides the medium, the 
result turns out to be unlistenable/unreadable/whatever crap 99% of the time? 
(If so, I'm in full agreement, but I'm not sure I see that tendency 
as "promethean" as much as I see it as just someone with three chords and a 
grudge, which is infinitely more quotidian...) "All bad poetry is sincere," etc.

> if the goal is exploring the relation of the visual + the audible, a direct
> one-to-one mapping could actually be the least interesting result.  a more
> personal, individualistic exploration of the many ways that sound + vision
> can interact would expand artistic possibilities, instead of reducing them.

Wouldn't that rather depend on what it was you were mapping? I'd think that 
dort of mapping with, say, a Mondrian painting would probably come out boring, 
but stick in some Hieronymous Bosch, Georges Seurat, or Jackson Pollock, and 
you end up with pure, beautiful chaos. At least, the way I've been envisioning 
the sonic output of such a thing.

R

--
* * *
"Snake Plisskin... I heard about 
you. Heard you were dead..."
http://xterminal.iuma.com

------------------------------