Re: [microsound] tech q's

[dp <dp@xxxxxxxxxx>]

> i would amend that to say that form is functionAL. the tools are the form
> (the carrier). the selection of components either at random or dictated
> by some unified concept is the meaning (the signal). they are related,
> they are certainly interactive, but i've heard plenty of artists remove one
> or the other to some effect.
to me, producing sounds by elctronic media, or using an "electronic
approach", is trasposing the information, the non stationary part of a
signal, to the form. the form is a sort of coded type of information,
created multiplexing the mean with the way the mean appear.
i think no one can denay that form is the essential part in the work of
oval, alva noto, deupree and so on. of course you can identify something (or
anything.....) under the form, but the influence of process and modus
operandi (and this is form) is definitely the mean(info, signal, whatever
you call it).
> it feels like i can hear two distinct dialogues, especially with certain
> artists. 
> that's the way my brain decodes it, i suppose.
decoding or demultiplexing, exactly.

--@dp

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